txbvavy  of  €he  Cheotygi'cal  Seminary 


PRINCETON  •  NEW  JERSEY 


PRESENTED  BY 

nr^^^t&te  of  the 
p^ssens  e,  Edmond  de,  1824 

Religion  and  the  reign  of 
terror,  or,  The  church 


Digitized  by 

the  Internet  Archive 

in  2014 

\ 


https://archive.org/details/religionreignoftOOpres_0 


RELIGION" 

AND  THE 

REIGN    OF  TERROR; 

OR, 

THE  CHURCH  DURING  THE  FRENCH  REVOLUTION. 


PREPARED  FROM  THE  FRENCH  OF 

M.  EDMOND  DE  TRESSENS^i, 

Author  of  "  Histoire  des  trois  premiers  siecles  de  l'Kslise  Chretienne,"  "Je'sus-Christ, 
son  temps,  sa  vie,  son  oeuvre ;  "  "  Le  Pays  de  l'Evangile,"  and  Editor 
of  "La  Revue  Chretienne.1' 


By  Rev.  JOHN  P.  LACROIX,  A.M. 


God  is  as  necessary  as  liberty  to  the  French  people.— Mirabeau. 
Free  Church— free  State.— Cavocr. 


NEW    YORK  : 

CARLTON    &    LA  N  A  HAN. 


CINCINNATI  : 
HITCHCOCK    ft  WALDEN. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1868,  by 
CARLTON  &  LAN  A  H  AN, 

in  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the 
Southern  District  of  New  York. 


LETTER  OF  AUTHORIZATION. 

[TRANSLATION.] 


 >  4>»  <  

Paris,  November  30,  1866. 

Professor  John  P.  Lacroix  : 

My  dear  Sir, — I  give  you  with  true  pleasure  the  authoriza* 
tion  which  you  ask  of  me  for  translating  my  book  entitled 
"  The  Church  and  the  Revolution."  * 

Sincerely  yours  in  Christ, 

E.  de  Pressense. 


*  The  full  title  of  the  work  is,  L'Eglise  et  La  Revolution  fran^aise; 
Histoire  des  Relations  de  l'Eglise  et  de  l'^tat  de  1789  a  1802. 


PREFACE  TO  THE  ABRIDGMENT. 


The  book  here  presented  to  the  American  reader  is 
an  abridged  translation  of  a  work,  recently  published 
in  Paris,  by  the  distinguished  Protestant  divine  M.  Ed- 
mond  de  Pressense,  the  object  of  which  is  to  describe, 
from  an  enlightened  Christian  stand-point,  the  vicissitudes 
of  religion  and  its  relations  to  the  civil  power  in  France, 
during  the  eventful  years  from  1789  to  1802.  Some  of  the 
motives  which  have  influenced  me  in  its  preparation  in 
English  are  the  following :  The  intrinsic  general  interest 
of  the  subject ;  its  special  interest  for  Americans ;  the 
peculiar  stand-point  and  personal  qualifications  of  the 
author ;  and,  finally,  the  careful  criticisms  of  the  reli- 
gious character  of  certain  world-historical  personages,  to 
which  the  nature  of  the  work  naturally  leads. 

Of  the  general  interest  of  whatever  throws  light  on 
this  great  revolutionary  crisis  of  humanity,  I  need 
scarcely  speak.  Of  the  crisis  itself  Mr.  Alison  uses  these 
words :  "  There  are  few  periods  in  the  history  of  the 
world  which  can  be  compared,  in  point  of  interest  and 
importance,  to  that  which  embraces  the  progress  and 


6 


PREFACE  TO  THE  ABRIDGMENT. 


termination  of  the  French  Revolution.  In  no  former  age 
were  events  of  such  magnitude  crowded  together,  or  in- 
terests so  momentous  at  issue  between  contending  nations. 
From  the  flame  which  was  kindled  in  Europe,  the  whole 
world  has  been  involved  in  conflagration,  and  a  new  era 
dawned  upon  both  hemispheres  from  the  effects  of  its  ex- 
pansion. With  the  first  rise  of  a  free  spirit  in  France, 
the  liberty  of  North  America  was  established."  Mr. 
Jones,  the  continuator  of  Russell's  history,  speaks  in 
similar  terms.  "We  are  now  brought,"  says  he,  "to 
enter  upon  a  subject  of  such  fearful  magnitude,  so  por- 
tentous in  its  origin,  and  terrific  in  its  consequences, 
that  the  annals  of  the  human  race  scarcely  present  us 
with  its  parallel.  The  French  Revolution  introduced  a 
new  state  of  society  in  Europe."  A  standard  German 
encyclopedia  speaks  as  follows :  "  The  French  Revolution 
constitutes  one  of  the  grandest  epochs  in  the  history  of 
human  society.  He  who  regards  it  as  a  mere  incidental 
event  has  not  examined  the  past,  and  is  unable  to  look 
into  the  future.  It  is  an  event  which  came  forth  out  of 
the  womb  of  the  centuries.  So  judges  Madame  de 
Stael ;  and  she  is  right."  M.  Michelet  says  :  "  I  define 
the  Revolution  as  the  advent  of  Law,  the  resurrection  of 
Right,  and  the  reaction  of  Justice.  I  see  upon  the 
stage  but  two  grand  facts,  two  principles,  two  actors, 
and  two  characters — Christianity  and  the  Revolution. 
The  Convocation  of  the  States-General,  in  1789,  is  the 


PREFACE  TO  THE  ABRIDGMENT. 


7 


true  era  of  the  birth  of  the  people.  On  the  eve  of  the 
opening  of  the  States-General  the  mass  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  was  solemnly  said  at  Versailles.  It  was  certainly 
that  day,  or  never,  that  the  people  might  sing  the  pro- 
phetic hymn:  Thou  wilt  create  peoples,  and  the  face  of 
the  earth  shall  be  renewed"  Such  is  the  general  manner 
in  which  this  event  is  spoken  of  both  by  the  friends  and 
the  enemies  of  France.  The  merit  of  M.  de  Pressense's 
book  is,  that  it  presents  an  exhaustive  view  of  one  of 
the  special  phases  of  this  Revolution,  namely,  the  relig- 
ious— a  phase  which,  though  among  the  most  important, 
has  yet  had  the  misfortune  either  of  being  treated  with 
neglect,  or  of  being  perverted  and  distorted  by  skeptics, 
to  the  prejudice  of  Christianity. 

The  special  interest  of  the  French  Revolution  for  re- 
publicans lies  in  the  nature  of  the  interests  that  were  at 
stake.  It  was,  on  the  one  hand,  a  struggle  of  liberty 
against  absolutism,  free  thought  against  spiritual  despo- 
tism ;  and,  on  the  other,  of  Christianity  against  a  godless 
philosophy ;  it  was,  therefore,  a  struggle  in  the  interest 
of  the  very  principles  which  lie  at  the  basis  of  American 
greatness.  But  the  great  Revolution  made  shipwreck : 
the  name  of  liberty  Was  tarnished  by  the  most  atrocious 
crimes  ;  Christianity  seemed  for  a  moment  to  have  gone 
down  in  a  night  of  blood  and  delirium,  amid  the  tri- 
umphant orgies  of  a  foul-mouthed  Atheism ;  and,  finally, 
political  liberty  was  trampled  in  the  dust,  and  forced  to 


s 


PEEFACE  TO  THE  ABRIDGMENT. 


give  place  to  the  most  absolute  of  despotisms.  How 
came  this  to  be  the  result?  Why  did  the  principles 
which  have  succeeded  so  well  in  America  meet  only  with 
disaster  and  failure  in  France?  The  question  is  inter- 
esting. For  more  than  half  a  century  the  political  and 
spiritual  despots  of  Europe  have  been  using  the  excesses 
of  the  French  Revolution  as  a  bugbear  to  frighten  their 
ministers  and  subjects  from  every  effort  in  favor  of 
liberty  and  Church  reform.  "  Unless  you  desire  to 
renew  the  horrors  of  the  reign  of  terror,  and  to  be 
subject  to  the  disgusting  domination  of  an  unwashed 
mob,  do  not  limit  the  authority  of  your  legitimate  rulers ; 
unless  you  wish  the  extinction  of  religion,  and  the  tri- 
umph of  vice  and  Atheism,  do  not  question  the  preten- 
sions of  your  priests,  or  presume  to  suppose  that  the 
Church  can  exist  without  being  salaried  and  governed 
by  the  State."  And,  unfortunately,  this  argument  has 
too  often  succeeded,  to  the  detriment  of  enlightened  lib- 
eralism. To  the  too  common  excessive  censure  of  the 
French  Revolution,  and  especially  to  the  prejudices 
thereby  created  against  the  causes  of  liberty  and  free- 
churchism,  the  book  of  M.  de  Pressense  is  a  sufficient 
and  convincing  reply.  These  holy  causes  of  liberty  and 
free-churchism  are  triumphantly  vindicated,  and  the  true 
cause  of  the  miscarriage  of  the  Revolution  assigned, 
namely,  a  radical  misconception  as  to  the  extent  to 
which  a  government  may  legitimately  interfere  with  per- 


PEE  FACE  TO  THE  ABRIDGMENT. 


9 


sonal  liberty,  and  as  to  the  proper  relations  of  the  civil 
power  of  the  Church. 

As  to  the  exact  stand-point  of  the  author,  he  has 
clearly  enough  expressed  himself  in  his  preface.  "  M} 
book,"  says  he,  "  is  animated  with  a  profound  love  of 
general  liberty,  but,  above  all,  of  the  liberty  of  the  soul 
and  the  conscience.  I  am  thoroughly  convinced  that  re- 
ligion and  liberalism  are  the  natural  allies  of  each  other. 
I  hope  I  have  written  in  that  impartial  spirit  which  guar- 
antees against  passion  and  injustice.  I  am  with  the 
Revolution  whenever  it  serves  the  cause  of  liberty,  and 
against  it  whenever  it  violates  it  by  so-called  measures 
of  public  safety.  I  confess,  in  fine,  that  I  cannot  see 
the  de?wuement  of  .this  grand  struggle,  in  the  foundation 
of  a  despotism  without  caste,  at  the  beginning  of  this 
century. 

"The  question  of  the  relation  of  the  spiritual  to  the 
temporal,  so  passionately  debated  by  our  fathers,  is  yet 
far  from  being  settled.  It  is  of  the  highest  moment  to 
the  cause  of  the  nation  and  of  modern  civilization.  On 
its  proper  decision  depends  the  triumph  of  a  true  over  a 
false  liberalism.  Full  liberty  of  worship  guarantees  the 
absolute  independence  of  the  conscience,  and  thus  erects 
the  surest  barrier  to  the  encroachments  of  the  State  on 
the  rights  of  the  individual.  It  therefore  gives  a  mortal 
blow  to  that  oppressive  centralizing  system  of  politics 

which  sacrifices  the  citizen  to  the  State,  and  the  indi- 

2 


10  PREFACE  TO  THE  ABRIDGMENT. 

vidual  to  the  collective  sovereignty.  The  question  is  of 
wide  scope.  The  solution  which  imposes  itself  on  my 
mind  is  that  which  Mirabeau  foresaw,  which  Lafayette 
and  Madame  de  Stael  openly  adopted,  and  presented  in 
vain  to  their  contemporaries  ;  and- which,  therefore,  pre- 
sumptively breathes  of  the  true  spirit  of  1789.  May  the 
bitter  experience  of  those  who  had  the  honor  of  pro- 
claiming it,  and  the  misfortune  of  so  often  violating  it, 
enlighten  our  path  !  I  trust  I  have  succeeded  in  pre- 
senting the  salutary  lesson  which  is  taught  by  our 
great  Revolution,  thus  contributing  my  feeble  part  to  the 
revival  of  a  true  public  spirit  in  France,  a  cause  in 
which  no  one  takes  more  interest  than  myself."  Such  is 
the  modest  and  yet  high  ambition  of  the  author.  His 
stand-point  is  essentially  liberal — republican. 

As  to  his  qualifications  for  the  task  little  need  be  said. 
Those  who  are  conversant  with  the  highest  critical 
journals  of  the  day  know  how  eminent  is  his  rank  for 
learning  and  piety,  not  only  in  France,  but  throughout 
Europe.  He  stands  at  the  head  of  the  evangelical  French 
clergy,  and  shares  his  energies  between  the  functions  of 
the  pastorate  and  those  of  the  critic  and  writer.  He  is 
the  author  of  the  best  Church  History  in  the  French 
language,  and  has  the  honor  of  being  the  most  successful 
antagonist  of  Renan.  His  Life  of  Jesus  places  him  in  the 
front  rank  among  the  recent  champions  of  Christianity. 

Last,  though  not  least  important,  might  be  mentioned 


PREFACE  TO  THE  ABRIDGMENT. 


11 


as  lending  interest  to  the  present  work,  the  bold  and 
candid  criticisms  of  character  which  it  contains.  The 
brief  fourteen  years  of  the  French  Revolution  witnessed 
the  rise  and  fall  of  a  succession  of  the  strangest  charac- 
ters which  appear  on-  the  pages  of  universal  history. 
How  grand,  how  weird,  how  ghostly  are,  in  turn,  the 
reminiscences  which  hover  around  the  names  of  Mira- 
beau,  Desmoulins,  Danton,  Hebert,  Chaumette,  Ana- 
charsis  Clootz,  Marat,  Charlotte  Corday,  Robespierre, 
Talleyrand,  Bonaparte,  and  many  others !  Nor  are  cer- 
tain associations  of  this  epoch  destitute  of  peculiar  in- 
terest :  such  are  the  Girondists,  the  Jacobins,  the  Athe- 
ists, the  Deists,  and  the  Theophilanthropists.  All  of 
these  characters  and  associations  are  taken  up,  discussed, 
dissected,  and,  finally,  weighed  in  the  balance  of  a  philo- 
sophic Christian  judgment.  I  will  mention  as  of  special 
importance,  the  chapters  which  treat  of  the  civil  and  re- 
ligious policy  of  Napoleon.  If  any  one  thing  more  than 
another  could  shake  one's  confidence  in  the  justness  of 
the  severe  verdict  of  the  author  as  to  the  baneful,  the 
anti-liberal  tendency  of  the  Napoleonic  system,  it  would 
be  that  so  bold,  so  free-spoken  a  book  has  been  permitted 
to  be  published  under  the  present  regime. 

As  a  whole,  and  apart  from  the  intrinsic  worth  of  its 
subject-matter,  the  work  leaves  on  the  mind  the  most 
salutary  impression.  It  breathes  of  a  generous  cosmo- 
politan spirit,  and  brings  the  reader  into  closer  sym- 


12 


PREFACE  TO  THE  ABRIDGMENT. 


pathy  with  the  great  suffering  heart  of  humanity.  It 
discloses  the  frightful  depths  of  degradation  to  which 
society  inevitably  sinks  when  it  breaks  loose  from 
the  authority  of  God.  It  reveals  in  the  bosom  of  a 
Church  which  seemed  to  be  dead  in  ritualism  and  sin, 
as  soon  as  the  hour  of  trial  came,  examples  of  Christian 
heroism  and  devotion  which  have  not  been  surpassed 
since  the  days  of  the  apostles. 

A  word  as  to  the  manner  in  which  the  work  has  been 
prepared  in  English.  The  original  is  an  octavo  volume 
of  four  hundred  and  seventy-five  pages.  The  present 
is  not  a  sentence-by- sentence  translation.  Some  por- 
tions, not  so  interesting  to  the  non-French  reader, 
have  been  closely  condensed,  while  others  have  been 
slightly  enlarged  by  additions  of  historical  or  elucidating 
details.  As  to  the  essence  of  the  book,  however,  its 
spirit,  its  doctrines,  its  judgments,  I  have  endeavored  to 
be  faithful  to  the  author. 

The  biographical  notes  which  I  have  subjoined  to  the 
volume  will  not,  I  trust,  be  devoid  of  value. 

J.  P.  Lacroix. 

Ohio  Wesleyan  University. 


CONTENTS. 


Preface   Page  5 

INTRODUCTION. 

SITUATION  OP  THE  CHURCH  OF  FRANCE  AT  THE  EVE  OF  THE  REVO- 
LUTION— STATE  OF  OPINION  AS  TO  LIBERTY  OF  CONSCIENCE  AND 
THE  ORGANIZATION  OF  WORSHIP. 

The  Religious  Question  and  the  Revolution — Condition  of  the  An- 
cient Church  of  France— Close  Alliance  with  the  Ancient  Regime — 
Catholicism  alone  recognized— Riches  and  Privileges  of  the  Church- 
Subordination  to  the  Civil  Power— Concordat  of  Francis  L  and  the  so- 
called  Gallican  Liberties— Increasing  Dependence  on  the  King— De- 
cline of  Faith— Maxims  of  Intolerance— Public  Opinion  against  the 
Church — Toleration  universally  demanded — Religious  Liberty  poorly 
understood— Fatal  Influence  of  Rousseau— Illiberal  Opinions  of  the 
Clergy— Difference  between  the  High  and  the  Inferior  Clergy  19 


BOOK  L 

THE  CONSTITUENT  ASSEMBLY. 
CHAPTER  L 

LEGISLATIVE    PRELIMINARIES  —  THE   FIRST   DEBATE   ON  LIBERTY  OF 
WORSHIP. 

Opening  of  the  States-General— Union  of  the  three  Orders— Role  of 
the  Mob  in  the  Revolution— The  Common  People  favorable  to  Relig- 
ion—Memorable Night  of  the  Fourth  of  August— Instances  of  Clerical 
Self-denial — Abolition  of  Tithes — Declaration  of  Human  Rights — First 
Debate  on  Liberty  of  Worship— Discourse  of  Mirabeau— Spirit  of  the 
Majority  of  the  Assembly   49 


14 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  II. 

DISCUSSION   ON  THE  PROPERTY  OF  THE  CLERGY — ATTITUDE  OF  THE 
DIFFERENT  PARTIES— SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  RELIGIOUS  ORDERS. 

Church  Property  before  the  Revolution — The  Question  comes  up  in 
the  Assembly  —  Propositions  of  Talleyrand  and  Mirabeau  —  Three 
Groups  of  Opinion — Opinion  of  the  Right — Opinion  of  the  Left — Ma- 
louet — Mirabeau — Resolution  of  the  Assembly — The  Revolution  not 
Radical  enough— Powers  of  the  State  over  the  Ancient  Corporate  So- 
cieties—  The  True  Solution  — The  Ecclesiastical  Committee  —  New 
Propositions— Alienation  of  the  Property  of  the  Clergy— The  Monastic 
Orders  —  Proposal  to  Salary  the  Clergy — The  Debate — Wrath  of  the 
Right— Motion  of  Dom  Gerle— Excitement  in  Paris— Failure  of  the 
Motion — Inconsistency  of  both  Parties — Reparation  made  to  the  Prot- 
estants— Civil  Rights  granted  to  Jews  and  Comedians  Page  66 

CHAPTER  HI. 

THE   CIVIL   CONSTITUTION   OF   THE    CLERGY— THE  ASSEMBLY  TRANS- 
FORMED INTO  A  COUNCIL. 

Plan  of  the  Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy — Discussion— Retroac- 
tivity admitted— This  Constitution  faithful  to  the  Ancient  Regime  91 

CHAPTER  IV. 

FIRST  RESISTANCE  OF  THE  CLERGY— TROUBLE  AT  NIMES  AND  MONT- 
AUBAN  —  POLITICAL  OATH  IMPOSED  ON  THE  CLERGY  —  PATHETIC 
SCENE  IN  THE  ASSEMBLY — ADDRESS  OF  MIRABEAU  TO  THE  NATION 
—PAMPHLET  OF  CAMILLE  DESMOULINS. 

War  breaks  out  between  the  Revolution  and  Religion — Effect  of 
the  Measures  of  the  Assembly  on  the  Country — Trouble  in  the  South 
and  in  Alsace — Massacres  at  Nimes— Beginning  of  Resistance  at  Rome 
— Proposition  to  impose  on  Ecclesiastics  an  Oath  of  Fidelity  to  the 
Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy — Discourse  of  Mirabeau — First  Effects 
of  the  Decree — Perplexity  of  the  King — He  Sanctions  the  Decree — 
Pathetic  Scene  in  the  Assembly — Violence  of  the  Radicals — Decree 
against  those  who  Refuse  the  Oath — Apologetic  Address — Eloquent 
but  Inconsequent  Address  of  Mirabeau— Pamphlet  of  Camille  Des- 
moulins   99 

CHAPTER  V. 

SCHISM  IN  THE  CHURCH— CORRESPONDENCE  WITH  ROME— DEBATE  ON 
THE  LIBERTY  OF  WORSHIP — DISCOURSES  OF  SIEYES  AND  TALLEY- 
RAND— DISSOLUTION  OF  THE  CONSTITUENT  ASSEMBLY. 

Annexation  of  Avignon  to  France— Letter  of  the  Pope  to  the  Bish- 
ops—Reply of  the  Bishops— Brief  of  the  Pope — The  Leading  Bishops 


CONTENTS. 


15 


of  the  new  State  Clergy— Their  first  Movements— Ridiculous  Charge 
of  Bishop  Gobel — Irritation  of  the  Paris  Populace  against  the  Non- 
juring  Clergy— Resolution  of  the  Municipality  against  Non-conforming 
Temples — The  King  Hindered  from  going  to  Church  at  St.  Cloud — 
Riot  against  Religious  Liberty— Noble  Attitude  of  Lafayette— Dis- 
course of  Talleyrand  —  Sieyes  defends  the  same  Cause  —  Increase  of 
Religious  Strife— Translation  of  the  Ashes  of  Voltaire  to  the  Pantheon 
—Close  of  the  Assembly— The  Attempted  Flight  of  the  King  hastens 
the  Crisis— Criticism  on  the  Constituent  Assembly   Page  119 


BOOK  II. 

THE  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLY  AND  THE  NATIONAL 
CONVENTION  UNTIL  THE  PROCLAMATION  OF  THE 
SEPARATION  OF  CHURCH  AND  STATE. 

CHAPTER  I. 

THE  RELIGIOUS  STRUGGLE  IN  THE  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLY. 

Composition  of  the  New  Assembly— Extravagance  of  the  Girondists 
— Situation  of  the  Country — Popular  Violence  against  the  Non-jurors 
— Condition  of  La  Vendee — Important  Report  —  La  Vendee  desires 
simply  Liberty  of  Worship— Rising  in  the  South— Blindness  of  the 
Papal  Court— Massacre  at  Avignon— Amnesty  procured  for  the  Guilty 
by  Vergniaud— Letter  of  Chenier  in  favor  of  a  Separation  of  Church 
and  State — Measures  against  the  Emigrated — Fauchet  demands  the 
Persecution  of  the  Non-jurors — Wise  Discourses  of  Torne,  Ducos,  and 
Gensoune'— Violence  of  Isnard— Iniquitous  Decree  of  the  29th  of  No- 
vember, 1791 — The  King  Vetoes  it— Noble  Petition  of  the  Municipality 
of  Paris— Contrary  Petition  of  the  Demagogues— Petition  of  Camille 
Dcsmoulins— Effects  of  the  Veto  in  the  Provinces— Shameful  Persecu- 
tion of  Non-jurors  and  Nuns — Protest  of  the  Refractory  Clergy — New 
Brief  of  the  Pope — Disorders  in  the  State  Clergy — Further  Persecution 
— Abolition  of  the  Clerical  Costume — Roland  Countenances  Illegal 
Persecutions— Feebleness  of  the  Moderates— Persecuting  Decree  of 
May  25,  1792— The  Violation  of  the  Palace  on  the  20th  of  June— Ter- 
rible Discourse  of  Vergniaud  against  the  King— Persecution  Redoub- 
led—The Massacre  on  the  10th  of  August— The  Massacres  of  Septem- 
ber   141 


16 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE  CHUKCH  DURING  THE  NATIONAL  CONVENTION  UNTIL  THE  ABOLI- 
TION OF  THE  SALARIES  OF  THE  CLEBGT. 

Character  of  the  Convention— Formation  of  the  Revolutionary  Tri- 
bunal— The  Majority  hostile  to  Religion — First  manifestation  thereof 
— The  Masses  of  Paris  ,as  yet  Religiously  Inclined — New  Form  of 
the  Oath  —  Transportation  —  Numerous  Non-jurors  Condemned  to 
Death — The  Constitution — Plans  of  Condorcet  and  Robespierre — Con- 
stitution of  1793 — Debate  on  the  Liberty  of  Worship — Robespierre 
Defends  the  Salarying  of  the  Church  by  the  State— Attacks  on  the 
new  State  Church— Gigantic  Efforts  of  the  Revolution — The  Reign  of 
Terror— The  Municipality  of  Paris  at  the  Head  of  the  Movement— The 
Atheistic  Calendar — First  Public  Outbreak  of  Atheism — Inauguration 
of  the  Worship  of  Reason  in  the  Convention— Shameful  public  Apos- 
tasies—Noble Christian  bearing  of  Deputy  Gregory — Spoils  of  the 
Churches  brought  to  the  Municipal  Authorities — Organization  of  the 
Worship  of  Reason — Impious  Orgies — Measures  of  Persecution — En- 
tire Proscription  of  Religion— Robespierre  Attacks  the  Atheists— His 
Discourse  at  the  Jacobin  Club — Ignoble  Recantation  of  Hebert  and 
Chaumette— Change  of  Tone  of  the  Convention— Robespierre  has  the 
Liberty  of  Worship  Proclaimed — Hypocritical  Decree  on  the  Liberty 
of  Worship— Condemnation  of  the  Dantonists — Discourse  of  Robes- 
pierre on  the  Supreme  Being — Festival  of  the  Supreme  Being  Voted 
—Celebration  of  the  Festival— The  9th  of  Thermidor   Page  187 


BOOK  III. 

THE  PERIOD  OF  THE  SEPARATION  OF  CHURCH  AND 
STATE. 

CHAPTER  L 

MEASURES  OF  THE  CONVENTION  IN  REGARD  TO  RELIGION  FROM  THE 
FALL  OF  ROBESPIERRE  TO  THE  EXPIRATION  OF  ITS  POWERS. 

Immorality  of  those  who  overthrew  Robespierre — Their  impious- 
ness— Continuation  of  the  Oppression  of  the  Priests— Sufferings  of 
"the  Priests  on  the  Pontoons— Gregory  Pleads  their  Cause— Fine  Dis- 
course of  Gregory— Cambon  Proposes  to  Abolish  the  Salaries  of  the 
Clergy— His  Proposition  Adopted— Motion  of  Boissy  d'Anglas— Law 
on  the  Liberty  of  Worship — Rigorous  Measures  against  the  Dissent- 
ing Clergy— Good  Effects  of  Toleration  in  La  Vende'e— Church  Edi- 


CONTENTS. 


17 


flees  Restored  to  the  Parishes— Worship  under  Strict  Police— Propo- 
sition to  Replace  Christian  Worship  by  the  Deistical  Civic  Festivals- 
Constitution  of  Year  III — Final  Measure  of  the  Convention  against 
the  Priests — Close  of  the  Convention     Page  2-19 

CHAPTER  II. 

RELATIONS  OF  CHURCH  AND  STATE  UNDER  THE  DIRECTORY. 

Shameful  Rule  of  the  Directory— The  Directory  the  Sworn  Enemy 
of  the  Liberty  of  Worship — Violence  of  the  Director)'  against  the 
Papacy — Treaty  of  Tolentino — Camille  Jordan  on  the  Liberty  of  Wor- 
ship—Fine  Discourse  of  Royer— Collard — Coup  <P£tat  of  the  18th  of 
Fructidor — Renewal  of  Persecution  against  the  Church— Compulsory 
Observance  of  the  Deistical  Festivals — Imprisonment  of  Pope  Pius 
YX  and  his  Death  at  Valence— End  of  the  Directory   272 

CHAPTER  IH. 

THE  ALTARS  RESTORED  BY  LIBERTY. 

Moral  Condition  of  the  Nation  under  the  Directory— Hostility  of  the 
Oflicial  and  Dissident  Catholic  Clergy — Establishment  of  the  Theo- 
philanthropist  Worship— Its  Character— Progress  of  the  Dissident 
Worship — It  Prospered  without  Help  from  the  State — Resuscitation  of 
the  Constitutional  Church — Role  of  Gregory  in  this  Work — Large 
Congng*ftiOB9  in  the  Churches — Severe  Morality  of  the  Constitutional 
Church — Worship  Re-established  in  Forty  Thousand  Parishes — Coun- 
cil of  the  Gallican  Clergy  in  1797 — Its  Acts — Second  Council  Dissolved 
by  Bonaparte — Situation  of  Protestantism  at  this  Epoch — The  Altars 
Restored  before  the  Concordat  ..   292 


BOOK  IV. 

THE  CONCORDAT. 
CHAPTER  I. 

PREPARATION  FOR  THE  CONCORDAT. 

Political  Circumstances  which  led  to  the  Concordat— The  real  Ob- 
iect  of  the  Concordat — Opinions  of  Napoleon  on  Religion — He  regards 
it  merely  as  an  Instrument  of  Governing — His  Speech  to  the  Priests 
at  Milan — His  Private  Opinions — Religious  Liberty  Inconsistent  with 
Despotic  Rajime — first  Measures  of  the  Consuls  in  regard  to  Religion 

% 


18 


CONTENTS. 


—Negotiations  with  Rome— The  Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy 
serves  as  a  Basis  — Public  Opinion  unfavorable  to  these  Negotia- 
tions—Explanations of  the  First  Consul— Religious  Discussion  For- 
bidden   Page  317 


CHAPTER  LL 

CONCLUSION  OF  THE  CONCORDAT. 

The  Negotiations — The  Slowness  of  Rome  Irritating  to  the  First 
Consul — Threatenings  of  Rupture — Gonzalvi  comes  to  Paris — Opinion 
at  Rome  favors  the  Concordat —Its  Conclusion  —  Opposition  in  the 
French  Legislative  Bodies — Purgation  of  the  Legislature — The  Or- 
ganic Laws  of  Germinal,  Year  X — Legislation  of  Germinal,  Tear  X — 
The  Concordat  presented  to  the  Tribunate  and  Legislature — Discourse 
of  Portalis — Of  Lucien  Bonaparte — Proclamation  of  the  Concordat — 
Ceremonies  at  Notre  Dame — Proclamation  of  Bonaparte  —  Public 
Opinion  is  not  Favorable   345 


CHAPTER  ILL 

EFFECTS  OF  THE  CONCORDAT — CONCLUSION. 

Effects  of  the  Concordat— Suppression  of  the  Liberty  of  "Worship — 
Moral  Enslavement  of  Protestantism  — Episcopal  Flatteries  to  the 
new  Monarch  —  Servility  of  the  High  Clergy — Wonderful  Imperial 
Catechism  —  Careful  Surveillance  over  the  Clergy  —  Severe  Measure 
against  all  who  do  not  submit— Debates  with  Rome— The  Pope  is  in- 
sulted—Open Rupture— Imprisonment  of  the  Pope— Napoleon  regrets 
the  Concordat— Cardinal  Pacca  Opposed  to  the  Temporal  Power  of 
the  Pope— Conclusion   359 


Biographical  Notes 


385 


INTRODUCTION. 


SITUATION  OF  THE  CHURCH  OF  FRANCE  AT  THE  EYE  OF 

THE  REVOLUTION  STATE  OF  OPINION  AS  TO  LIBERTY 

OF  CONSCIENCE  AND  THE  ORGANIZATION  OF  WORSHIP. 

I  desire  to  review  the  history  of  the  relations  of 
Church  and  State  during  the  French  Revolution,  from 
the  moment  when  this  great  movement  broke  out  over 
France  and  Europe,  drunk  with  youth  and  enthusiasm, 
and  inspired  with  an  inexperienced  ardor  for  universal 
reform,  to  the  unpropitious  hour  in  which  it  seemed  or- 
ganized forever  in  .force  and  glory  in  a  spirit  the  very 
contrary  of  the  principles  which  had  animated  it  at  its 
onset.  Napoleon  has  been  fondly  styled  the  heir  of  the 
French  Revolution  ;  nevertheless,  the  great  and  gen- 
erous spirit  of  1*789  had  most  decidedly  ceased  to  live 
before  he  became  master  of  France.  Because  the  blood 
of  the  ancient  races  did  not  course  in  his  veins,  because 
he  did  not  re-establish  the  privileges  of  caste,  it  has 
been  the  fashion  to  view  him  as  the  armed  representa- 
tive of  that  Revolution,  and  as  its  triumphant  missionary. 
It  has  been  pretended  that  he  caused  it  to  enter  the 
capitals  of  absolutist  Europe  at  the  gallop  of  his  war- 
horse  ;  and  yet  the  fact  is,  that  the  first  capital  he  entered 
as  dictatorial  general  was  Paris  itself — Paris  submit- 


20 


INTRODUCTION. 


ting  to  absolute  power  rejuvenated  by  victory,  and  thus 
renouncing  the  very  principles  which  had  animated  it 
with  enthusiasm  ten  years  previously.    For,  whatever 
may  be  said  by  hired  sophists,  ever  ready  to  laud  and 
beautify  servitude,  the  essence  of  IT 89  was  the  great 
principle  of  general  liberty.    Civil  equality  is  only  one 
of  its  consequences.    And  as  soon  as  this  is  detached 
from  the  vigorous  trunk  which  produces  it,  one  of  two 
things  is  certain  to  result — either  it  withers  and  perishes, 
(for  privilege  springs  most  generally  from  the  arbitrary,) 
or  there  remains  thereof  merely  a  vain  semblance,  a  mass 
of  dry  leaves  driven  at  the  will  of  every  capricious 
breath.    This  sudden  abortion  of  one  of  the  noblest 
movements  of  humanity  continues  to  be  the  most  worthy 
and  interesting  problem  of  contemporary  history.  The 
problem  has  been  treated,  as  a  whole,  by  many  eminent 
minds.    My  ambition  is  less  vast.    I  desire  to  confine 
myself  to  a  single  one  of  its  many  phases — to  write  the 
history  of  religion  during  the  French  Revolution,  to 
mark  the  real  progress  accomplished  at  the  opening  of 
the  new  era,  to  signalize  honestly  the  faults  committed, 
to  indicate  the  fatal  mistake  which  gradually  led  to  the 
legalized  enslavement  of  the  Church,  and,  without  ex- 
cusing the  final  excesses  of  a  power  which  knew  no  con- 
trol, to  seek  in  anterior  history  the  causes  which  almost 
necessarily  led  to  them.    Such  is  my  design.    There  is 
no  surer  means  than  this  of  comprehending  the  cruel 
disappointments  from  which  we  are  still  suffering ;  for 
I  am  thoroughly  convinced  that  nothing  contributed 
more  fatally  to  the  downfall  of  liberty  than  the  errors 
of  our  fathers  as  to  the  mode  of  organizing  religion  in 


INTRODUCTION. 


21 


Fiance.  An  attentive  study  of  tlie  progress  of  the 
French  Revolution  demonstrates  that  that  which 
checked  the  chariot  of  liberty,  so  grandly  sent  forth  at 
the  start,  and  finally  precipitated  it  into  the  bloody  dis- 
grace of  terrorism,  was  precisely  an  inadequate  compre- 
hension, and  a  too  hasty  decision,  of  the  question  of 
religion. 

Though  the  French  Revolution  had  proclaimed  im- 
mortal truths,  and  recognized  sacred  rights,  yet  when 
it  attempted  to  infringe  on  the  sacred  domain  of  con- 
science it  excited  the  most  invincible  opposition.  This 
opposition  exasperated  it,  and  turned  it  aside  from  the 
path  of  fruitful  and  lasting  reforms.  It  irritated  its 
proud  and  formidable  genius,  and  led  to  the  extinguish- 
ment of  its  benefits  in  a  long  paroxysm  of  wrath.  This 
eighteenth  century,which  seemed  so  thoroughly  skeptical, 
was  really  troubled  more  deeply  by  the  question  of  religion 
than  by  any  other.  It  is  well  to  recognize  this  to  the  honor 
of  humanity.  In  spite  of  appearances  the  heart  of  man- 
kind is  more  profoundly  moved  by  spiritual  than  by 
material  interests.  This  explains  the  paramount  im- 
portance of  questions  of  this  class,  even  when  they 
relate  merely  to  the  civil  organization  of  religion,  for 
the  question  of  form  is  readily  confounded  with  the 
question  of  essence.  And  to  defend  the  absolute  liberty 
of  the  conscience  is  one  of  the  first  duties  of  religion. 

In  the  France  of  to-day  the  problem  which  was 
broached  in  1789  is  still  unsolved.  The  concordat 
which  Xapoleon  imposed  on,  or  rather,  extorted  from, 
the  Pope,  has  resolved  no  difficulty.  Like  eveiy  arbi- 
trary act,  it  has  only  served  to  complicate  the  situation. 


22 


INTRODUCTION. 


Our  own  blunders,  however,  are  much  less  excusable 
than  those  of  our  fathers,  for  we  cannot  overbalance 
them  by  real  and  signal  reforms.  In  fact  of  tolerance, 
they  had  said  every  thing  from  the  very  start.  To-day 
we  enjoy  their  conquests,  which  no  reaction  has  been 
able  to  compromise,  so  securely  are  they  based  on  eter- 
nal right.  But  let  us  temper  with  discriminating  criti- 
cism the  admiration  they  so  legitimately  inspire.  Giv- 
ing them  due  credit  for  the  great  truths  they  proclaimed, 
let  us  frankly  signalize  the  elements  of  falsehood  and 
injustice  which  their  system  involved.  And  for  this  we 
are  the  better  prepared,  inasmuch  as  we  can  now  clearly 
see  that  in  their  mistakes  they  were  much  rather  timid 
conservatives  than  daring  reformers.  They  were  influ- 
enced by  the  ideas  of  ancient  France  at  the  very  mo- 
ment when  they  thought  they  had  constructed  against 
them  the  most  formidable  instrument  of  war.  It  is  from 
this  source  that  the  Revolution  had  learned  to 
strengthen  beyond  measure  the  central  power,  and  to 
give  to  the  State  what  belonged  alone  to  the  individual. 
It  is  no  wonder  that  the  new  wine  could  not  be  con- 
fined by  the  old  vessels.  I  shall  hope  to  have  rendered 
a  real  service  to  my  country  if  I  can  clearly  point  out 
the  shoals  on  which,  for  a  short  time  only,  as  we  assur- 
edly believe,  one  of  the  noblest  of  revolutions  has  made 
shipwreck. 

In  attempting  to  understand  the  mutual  relations  of 
the  Church  and  the  State,  at  the  eve  of  the  French 
Revolution,  the  first  thing  which  strikes  us  is  their  close 
association  as  to  politics,  and  their  profound  separation 
as  to  theory  and  aspiration.    This  contrariety  becomes 


INTRODUCTION.  23 

more  and  more  violent  the  further  we  advance.  It  led 
finally  to  the  fatal  blunder  which  divorced  liberalism  in 
France  from  the  Christian  religion.  It  was  precisely 
the  political  union  that  provoked  and  envenomed  the 
moral  separation.  The  Church  was,  so  to  speak,  in- 
crusted  in  an  order  of  things  which  shocked  the  public 
conscience ;  the  altar  had  been  the  strongest  support  of 
the  ancient  and  now  hated  system  of  government. 
Every  reformatory  and  progressive  aspiration,  meeting 
in  this  system  an  obstacle  and  barrier  at  its  very  start, 
was  naturally  led  to  attack  it  with  unmeasured  violence. 
The  result  was,  that  the  liberal  cause  soon  became  alien- 
ated from  the  Church  and  identified  with  irreligion. 
All  who  were  young  of  heart  and  ardent  for  the  vindi- 
cation of  right  and  liberty,  were  in  so  far  predisposed 
to  reject  Christianity  without  hesitation.  Life,  pro- 
found conviction,  conquering  proselytism,  were  all  on 
the  side  of  a  skeptical  philosophy.  The  Church  was 
not  only  stationary  in  the  midst  of  this  life,  but  even 
undertook  the  vain  task  of  arresting  and  beating  back 
the  rising  flood  of  enthusiasm,  The  eighteenth  century 
was  imbued  with  one  of  the  grand  ideas  born  of  the 
Gospel.  I  mean  the  idea  of  humanity,  the  idea  ot 
human  right  vindicated  in  the  face  of  those  caste  privi- 
leges which  are  its  negation.  It  was  found  that  the 
Church  had  taken  sides  in  advance  against  the  very 
principles  which  it  should  have  been  the  first  to  pro- 
claim, since  it  had  in  its  own  hands  the  book  which  had 
disseminated  and  caused  to  triumph  in  the  Roman  em- 
pire the  immortal  words,  (the  chart  of  equality  and  true 
liberty,)  that  in  Christ  there  is  neither  bond  nor  free. 


24 


INTRODUCTION. 


Thus  by  the  fault  of  its  representatives,  the  very  relig- 
ion which  had  taught  the  world  the  ideas  of  humanity 
and  right,  came  to  be  regarded  by  liberal  spirits  as  the 
very  foe  which  they  must  first  conquer  in  their  work  of 
vindicating  principles  which  itself  had  first  proclaimed. 
In  the  confusion  of  the  age,  the  ancient  pagan  view  was 
defended  by  the  pretended  successors  of  those  who  had 
once  overthrown  it ;  and  the  social  and  humane  princi- 
ples of  Christianity  were  defended  by  those  who  were 
resuscitating  the  naturalism  of  the  pagan  world — the 
impure  source  of  all  the  injustice  and  abuses  of  despot- 
ism.   Thus  the  most  discordant  elements  were  mingled 
together ;  justice  and  religion,  which  should  have  been 
indissolubly  joined,  were  violently  and  perniciously 
separated.    They  fought  in  opposing  armies,  and  every 
stroke  dealt  by  the  one  on  the  other  weakened  them 
.  both.    This  fatal  divorce,  though  dating  far  back  in  the 
past,  had  been  renewed  and  consummated  at  the  close 
of  the  seventeenth  century  by  one  of  the  greatest 
crimes  of  history — by  the  murderous  expulsion  of  that 
portion  of  the  religious  public  which  was  not  bowed 
under  the  yoke  of  llomish  unity.    The  ruins  of  the 
Jansenist  community  of  Port  Royal,  and,  above  all, 
those  living  remains  of  the  Protestant  Church  who 
were  bound  as  slaves,  and  forced  to  row  the  galleys  of 
the  Mediterranean,  or  who  sought  at  the  risk  of  life  to 
meet  together  in  the  desert  for  worship,  reminded  con- 
tinually an  emancipated  and  indignant  generation  of 
the  pernicious  union  of  religious  with  civil  despotism, 
and  of  the  severe  discipline  they  had  suffered  under  the 
ferule  of  that  devout  and  all-powerful  Papist,  Madame 


INTRODUCTION. 


25 


dc  Maintenon,  during  the  last  years  of  Louis  XIV. 
This  ferule  had  been  too  long  the  scepter  of  France,  and 
France  had  been  compelled  to  too  bitter  a  penance  for 
the  early  sins  of  the  most  selfish  of  monarchs. 

The  seventeenth  century  had  not  been  content  with 
transmitting  these  sad  remembrances  to  the  succeeding 
age — remembrances  which  were  yet  visible  realities, 
since  the  proscription  of  Jansenism  and  Protestantism 
was  still  in  full  force.  It  had  even  defended  its  theory 
and  sanctioned  its  practice  by  the  immortal  eloquence 
of  Bossuet,  its  greatest  preacher.  His  book,  Politics 
drawn  from  the  Bible,  consecrates  the  maxims  of  a 
twofold  despotism,  and  was  destined  to  excite  the  in- 
tensest  wrath  in  the  coming  generation.  This  cunning 
catechism,  in  which  an  unlimited  monarchy  and  an  un- 
curbed priesthood  learn  how,  by  uniting  their  power,  to 
control  and  entirely  subjugate  a  great  nation,  may  be 
regarded  as  the  testament  of  the  age  of  Louis  XIV. 
This  testament  was  broken  and  scornfully  repudiated  in 
that  brilliant  and  powerful  but  scoffing  literary  parlia- 
ment of  the  eighteenth  century,  which  was  presided 
over  by  the  genius  of  Voltaire.*  The  book  of  Bossuet  is 
the  apotheosis  of  the  ancient  regime  and  its  worst  abuses. 
It  presents  the  king  as  a  deity,  whose  appearance  rejoices 
the  people  as  the  sun,  and  whose  unquestionable  voli- 
tions should  be  received  on  bended  knees.  It  is  a  deity, 
it  is  true,  somewhat  like  those  of  Homer,  exposed  to  all 
the  passions  of  men,  and  rather  inclined  to  fall  into 
them.  The  counsels  which  the  eloquent  bishop  gives 
to  the  prince  are  good  enough ;  they  show  to  how  many 

♦See  Appendix,  note  1. 
4 


26 


INTRODUCTION. 


crimes  absolute  power  is  exposed,  and  what  terrible 
consequences  they  may  have  in  the  world  to  come ;  but 
these  counsels  terrify  rather  than  assure,  for  they  reveal 
the  possibility  of  evil  for  which,  when  once  committed, 
there  is  no  remedy ;  since  there  is  no  resource  against 
the  royal  will,  and  since  his  subjects,  after  timidly  re- 
monstrating, have  only  to  kiss  the  dust  into  which  his 
foot  has  crushed  them.  There  is  no  right  in  face  of  the 
royal  right.  I  mistake ;  there  is  the  right  of  the  clergy, 
for  whom  alone  Bossuet  makes  a  haughty  exception. 
All  the  property  of  the  kingdom  belongs  to  the  mon- 
arch, except  that  of  the  clergy ;  with  this  he  has  noth- 
ing to  do,  except  to  increase  it.  A  king  who  under- 
stands well  his  duties  is  not  content  with  opening  his 
treasures  and  enriching  the  Church.  He  remembers 
that  it,  though  detesting  bloodshed,  yet  has  need  of  it, 
and,  using  his  sword  to  execute  its  will,  banishes  its 
enemies,  or  immolates  them  at  the  stake  for  the  greater 
glory  of  God,  as  at  the  revocation  of  the  Edict  of 
Nantes.  Heresy  is  not  tolerated  in  the  happy  land 
which  he  governs :  "  Those  who  maintain  that  the 
prince  should  not  use  force  in  matters  of  religion,  for 
the  reason  that  religion  should  be  free,  are  in  an  im- 
pious error."  Bossuet  recalls  and  insists  on  the  solemn 
oath  given  by  the  Most  Christian  King,  the  day  of  his 
coronation,  for  the  extirpation  of  heresy.  All  these  fine 
theories  are  supported  by  texts  of  Scripture,  whose 
meaning  is  entirely  distorted;  for  the  learned  bishop 
applies  to  modern  states  that  which  related  only  to  the 
Jewish  theocracy,  which  was  essentially  of  a  transitory 
character.    Thus  he  brings  about  this  double  result  of 


INTRODUCTION.  27 

making  monarchy  and  Christianity  seem  both  hateful 
alike,  and  of  preparing  inevitably  a  most  dangerous 
revolution.  One  might  suppose  the  effect  of  such  a 
book  in  some  measure  counteracted  by  the  humane  po- 
litical system  of  Fenelon,  which,  though  clothed  in  a 
pagan  form,  was  much  more  Christian  than  that  of  Bos- 
suet  ;  but  such  was  not  the  case.  His  book,  Telemaque, 
was  but  a  poetic  Utopia,  the  splendid  dream  of  him 
whom  Louis  XIV.  had  styled  the  most  chimerical  spirit 
of  his  kingdom.  On  the  contrary,  Bossuet's  Politics 
drawn  fro??,,  the  Bible  was  the  faithful  portraiture  of  the 
organization  of  religion  in  France  down  to  the  very 
moment  when  the  most  daring  vows  were  made  for  the 
entire  renovation  of  society.  Let  us  present  a  review  of 
that  organization. 

The  Catholic  Church  of  France  enjoyed  the  highest 
privileges.  Since  the  proscription  of  the  Protestants  it 
was  without  a  rival,  and  possessed  full  sway  in  the 
whole  of  France.  It  possessed  all  the  edifices  for  wor- 
ship, while  the  most  secret  retreats  could  not  shield  the 
Protestants  from  the  cruel  hirelings  of  bigotry.  They 
had  not  only  lost  the  right  of  professing  their  creed, 
they  had  lost  the  right  of  existing.  As  soon  as  they 
were  discovered  they  fell  under  the  vengeance  of  the 
laws.  Neither  their  births  nor  marriages  were  recog- 
nized as  legitimate;  all  public  offices  were  closed 
against  them,  and  their  children  were  considered  as 
belonging  to  the  Catholic  Church.  The  people  of  Al- 
sace alone,  thanks  to  special  treaties  made  at  the  time 
of  the  conquest  of  that  province,  enjoyed  liberty  of  con- 
science.   As  to  Jews,  they  were  barely  tolerated;  for 


28 


INTRODUCTION. 


they  were  oppressed  by  special  taxes  and  a  very  severe 
police,  and  were  likewise  excluded  from  public  func- 
tions. The  Catholic  Church,  therefore,  possessed  the 
whole  field.  By  the  monoply  of  the  marriages  and 
baptisms  the  entire  state  was  in  some  measure  in  its 
hands.  Its  voice  alone  was  heard  from  one  frontier  to 
the  other.  If  one  wished  to  publish  a  book  which 
might  give  it  offense,  he  was  necessitated  to  go  to  Hol- 
land. It  enjoyed  almost  complete  control  of  the  educa- 
tion of  the  youth.  Thus  the  minds,  the  souls,  of  the 
whole  population  were  officially  in  its  power.  To  ac- 
complish its  work  the  clergy  possessed  immense  riches, 
and  a  considerable  portion  of  the  soil.  They  had  re- 
ceived them  from  the  piety  of  the  faithful,  and  from  the 
terrors  of  the  death-bed.  The  kings  of  France  had  given 
largely  in  their  favor ;  and  if  one  may  estimate  the  num- 
ber of  their  sins  by  the  quantity  of  their  donations,  the 
list  was  frightful  indeed.  The  following  is  a  low  esti- 
mate of  some  of  the  branches  of  the  revenue  of  the 
clergy.  At  the  head  stand  11  Archbishops  and  116 
Bishops,  with  an  aggregate  annual  income  of  8,400,000 
francs.  The  income  of  the  Grand  Vicars  and  Canons 
was  at  least  13,400,000 ;  that  of  seven  hundred  and 
fifteen  abbeys  9,000,000  ;  that  of  seven  hundred  and 
three  priories  1,400,000;  that  of  several  hundred  other 
monastic  institutions  7,042,000.  The  curates  and  their 
vicars  formed  the  secular  clergy  who  served  the  35,156 
parishes.  They  were  supported  by  tithes  and  various 
casual  receipts.  The  regular  clergy  filled  the  convents, 
and  numbered  about  51,000  in  the  aggregate.  One 
half  of  the  income  of  the  French  Church  arose  from 


INTRODUCTION. 


29 


tithes,  and  the  whole  of  its  acknowledged  revenue 
amounted  to  nearly  130,000,000  francs  ;  and  if  to  this 
we  add  the  casual  receipts,  it  would  not  perhaps  fall 
below  200,000,000  francs,  or  40,000,000  dollars  annually. 
The  property  of  the  clergy  was  exempt  from  taxation, 
but  they  contributed  to  the  support  of  the  State  by  a 
voluntary  donation  of  16,000,000  francs  every  five  years, 
though  much  of  this  was  usually  employed  in  liquida- 
ting previously  contracted  debts. 

Certainly  the  State  had  been  sufficiently  prodigal  of 
privileges  and  riches  toward  the  Church ;  but,  in  return, 
it  had  reduced  it  to  a  state  of  cramping  dependence.  The 
eldest  and  cherished  son  of  the  Church  had  taken  .pre- 
cautions against  his  mother,  and  had  bound  her  hands 
with  cords  which,  though  golden,  were  none  the  less 
galling.  The  king  felt  her  ascendant  as  often  as  the  fear 
of  damnation  stirred  in  his  breast,  or  age  or  disease  re- 
minded him  of  the  tolling  funeral  bell  of  St.  Denis, 
where  his  bones  were  finally  to  rest ;  but  the  laws,  re- 
strictive of  the  liberty  of  the  Church,  none  the  less. con- 
tinued in  force.  These  laws  constitute  what  it  has 
seemed  proper  to  term  the  liberties  of  the  Gallican 
Church.  These  famous  maxims,  full  of  a  spirit  of  just 
suspicion  against  the  encroachments  of  Rome  and  of  a 
rich  and  ambitious  clergy,  were  the  work  of  the  founders 
of  a  despotic  monarchy,  and  tended  to  enslave  the 
Church  and  reduce  it  to  a  mere  instrument  of  govern- 
ment. To  forbid  the  clergy  to  assemble  in  convention 
without  special  royal  permit,  or  the  bishops  to  communi- 
cate freely  with  the  spiritual  head  of  Catholicism,  was  evi- 
dently to  put  the  religious  conscience  rudely  under  the 


30 


INTRODUCTION. 


hand  of  the  State.  It  is  true,  however,  that  it  was  dan- 
gerous for  the  civil  authority,  in  view  of  the  power 
and  wealth  of  the  clergy,  to  relax  this  control.  It  is 
thus  that  the  riches  which  tended  to  corrupt  them  began 
by  reducing  them  to  subjection.  To  appreciate  this  sit- 
uation of  the  French  Church,  we  must  first  have  a  clear 
view  of  its  relations  with  the  Roman  See. 

It  was  in  the  Middle  Ages  that  these  relations  were 
most  wisely  regulated ;  I  mean,  by  the  pragmatic  sanc- 
tion made  between  St.  Louis  and  the  Pope,  in  1268,  and 
confirmed  at  Bourges  by  Charles  VII.  in  1434.  These 
wise  arrangements,  which  secured  to  the  Church  the 
right  of  electing  its  own  dignitaries,  and  guarded  against 
the  encroachments  of  the  Roman  See,  were,  however,  ab- 
rogated by  the  concordat  concluded  with  the  Pope  by 
Francis  I.  in  1516.  It  was  a  most  grievous  abuse  of 
power  for  the  king  to  make  this  arrangement  with  the 
ambitious  Leo  X.  without  consulting  the  Church.  He 
arrogated  to  himself  the  right  of  making  nominations 
to  the  parishes  and  bishoprics,  and  left  in  the  hands  of 
the  Pope  the  formidable  power  of  confirming  them  by 
bulls.  A  refusal  of  these  bulls  was  enough  to  convulse 
the  entire  nation.  This  was  perceived  too  late — during 
a  crisis  in  the  reign  of  Louis  XIY.  On  the  one  hand, 
one  saw  the  clergy  bowed  at  the  foot  of  the  throne,  and 
defending  its  privileges  with  their  utmost  ability ;  on  the 
other,  the  proud  monarch  was  forced,  after  a  long  refusal 
of  the  bulls  had  deeply  agitated  the  whole  land,  to  hu- 
miliate himself  and  yield  to  the  Holy  See. 

Assuredly  the  maxims  of  the  Gallican  Church,  as 
strengthened  by  the  famous  declaration  of  the  clergy, 


INTRODUCTION. 


31 


drawn  up  by  Bossuet  in  1682,  had  wisely  guarded  against 
the  interference  of  the  Pope  in*the  government  of  France, 
but  they  had  none  the  less  consecrated  the  subjection 
of  the  Church  to  the  State.    In  the  eighteenth  century 
the  royal  council  could  declare,  without  raising  opposi- 
tion, that  the  government  had  the  right,  before  authori- 
zing the  decrees  of  the  Church,  to  examine  them,  and  to 
interdict  any  thing  that  might  agitate  or  disturb  the 
public  tranquillity.  We  admit  the  merits  of  the  Gallican 
Church  for  her  resistance  to  Ultramontanism ;  we  recog- 
nize her  virtues,  talents,  and  patriotism,  but  we  cannot 
forget  that  she  has  sacrificed  more  than  one  precious 
liberty  to  the  great  French  idol— I  mean  the  State.  She 
allowed  to  be  forged  for  herself  a  heavy  yoke,  which,  as 
soon  as  it  ceased  to  be  of  gold,  and  was  imposed,  not 
by  royal  hands,  but  by  a  popular  assembly,  became 
utterly  intolerable.    We  will  see,  in  fact,  that  in  order 
to  enslave  the  Church,  the  French  Revolution  had  only 
to  act  consistently  with  the  principles  laid  down  by 
Bossuet  and  Louis  XIV.   Constantly  associated  with  all 
the  iniquities  of  the  ancient  regime  in  the  eighteenth 
century,  and  even  surpassing  them  by  her  own,  the 
Church  of  France  was  destined  to  excite  the  most  intense 
opposition,  without  signalizing  herself  by  noble  virtues. 
For  deplorable  indeed  was  her  moral  condition  previ- 
ously to  the  time  when,  in  the  reign  of  terror,  she  arose 
by  martyrdom,  and  purified  herself  in  her  own  blood. 

The  state  of  things  we  have  just  described  was  but 
the  continuation  of  what  had  existed  in  France  for 
centuries.  The  only  change  that  had  taken  place  was 
in  public  opinion;  but  this  sufficed  to  present  abuses 


32 


INTRODUCTION. 


which,  in  the  past,  had  been  tolerated  or  connived  at, 
in  their  true  light.  The*  public  conscience,  once  awak- 
ened, grew  indignant  at  that  which  for  a  long  time  had 
excited  no  scruples ;  and  it  was  enough  that  the  Church 
should  remain  as  in  the  past,  to  arouse  the  most  vehe- 
ment indignation.  Unfortunately  she  was  much  more 
occupied  with  her  internal  strifes  and  pecuniary  interests 
than  with  the  formidable  attacks  of  a  skeptical  philosophy. 

Nothing  is  sadder  than  the  religious  history  of  the 
eighteenth  century.  Piety  languished,  and  science,  at 
least  on  the  side  of  the  Church,  was  null.  In  England 
|  and  Germany  a  withering  breath  brooded  over  hearts 
and  souls.  In  Protestant  pulpits  a  religion  without 
grandeur  and  without  mysteries  was  languidly  preached, 
which  had  neither  the  boldness  of  philosophy  nor  the 
enthusiasm  of  faith.  A  cowardly  compromising  spirit 
prevailed.  In  the  French  Church  the  declension  was 
visible  to  all  eyes.  Since  the  death  of  Massillon,  in  1742, 
no  eloquent  voice  had  been  heard  in  the  evangelical 
pulpit,  if  we  except  the  few  trumpet  tones  of  studied  ve- 
hemence of  Father  Bridaine.  The  priestly  spirit  had 
full  career.  Having  little  to  persecute  without,  the  dom- 
inant party  began  the  work  within  the  Church,  attempt- 
ing to  impose  the  ultra  Papal  bull  Unigenitus,  which 
the  Jesuitical  courtiers  of  Louis  XIV.  had  induced 
Clement  XI.  to  issue  against  the  good  Quesnel  and  the 
feeble  remnants  of  Jansenism,  on  all  who  had  not  yet 
bowed  to  the  Ultramontane  yoke.  The  death-bed  of  the 
most  estimable  priests  was  jealously  spied,  and  clerical 
persecution  ceased  only  with  the  last  breath.  But  the 
Jansenists  obtained  little  glory  in  the  strife.    There  is 


INTRODUCTION. 


33 


something,  in  fact,  sadder  still  than  the  destruction  of 
the  noble  establishment  of  Port  Royal — I  mean  the  moral 
degeneracy  of  Jansenism  itself.  That  grand  school 
which  had  given  to  France  St.  Cyran  and  Pascal  had 
really  fallen  into  dotage.  It  was  now  occupied  chiefly 
with  apocryphal  miracles,  and  the  fanatical  convulsion- 
aries  of  St.  Medard  passed  for  the  genuine  disciples  of 
the  saints  and  heroes  who  had  defended  the  liberty  of  the 
Church  and  produced  some  of  the  noblest  masterpieces 
of  literature.  These  quarrels  of  the  Catholics  were 
freely  talked  about  in  the  court  and  the  world.  The 
persecutors  excited  indignation,  but  the  persecuted  were 
only  pitied  and  laughed  at.  Could  there  be  a  more  de- 
plorable condition  for  the  Church  ? 

At  the  same  time  the  attacks  of  philosophy  were 
growing  more  pressing,  and  making  a  deeper  knpression 
on  the  public  mind.    It  was  necessary  to  answer  them. 
With  one  or  two  exceptions  these  replies  were  merdj 
monkish  balderdash,  and  evinced  neither  logical  ability] 
nor  deep  learning.    To  succeed  in  this  work,  it  would 
have  been  necessary  to  separate  the  Gospel  from  the 
chaff  with  which  a  rich  and  privileged  Church  had  cor- 
rupted it.    As  it  was,  the  apologists  did  little  more  than 
furnish  excellent  matter  for  the  wit  of  Voltaire  and  the 
Encyclopedists.     Recourse  was  had  to  strokes  of  au- 
thority and  official  condemnation.   It  was  easier  to  refute 
error  by  documents  affixed  to  the  doors  of  cathedrals 
than  to  meet  it  in  honorable  fight.    The  reunions  of  the 
clergy  in  the  eighteenth  century  had  not  failed,  every 
time  they  occurred,  to  anathematize  philosophism,  and 

denounce  it  to  the  authorities,  at  the  same  time  recom 

5 


•34  INTRODUCTION. 

mending  for  promotion  such*  priests  as  had  signalized 
themselves  in  this  inglorious  contest.    This  attitude  of 
St.  Michael  crushing  the  demon  produced  no  very  sal- 
utary effect :  in  the  first  place,  because  the  enemy  was 
already  in  legal  chains;  and,  secondly,  because  the  cham- 
pions of  the  celestial  cause  were  far  from  possessing  the 
necessary  immaculate  purity.    While  the  official  faith 
continued  the  same,  the  real  faith  was  growing  weaker 
and  weaker,  even  in  the  ranks  of  the  clergy.  They 
seemed  to  vie  with  each  other  in  rendering  tfceir  order 
I  as  vulnerable  as  possible.   Those  who  retained  the  pure 
faith,  and  led  good  lives,  were  hidden  in  the  obscurity 
of  convents  or  country  parishes ;  while  those  who  ap- 
peared in  public,  in  the  court  and  at  Paris,  were  fre- 
quently implicated  in  deplorable  scandals.    Too  often 
they  celebrated  a  mass  in  which  they  no  longer  had 
faith,  and  appeared  at  the  altar  redolent  with  the  per- 
fumes of  the  boudoir.     The  race  of  free-thinking  and 
gallant  abbots  was  only  too  numerous.    They  encum- 
bered the  drawing-rooms,  and  called  to  mind  one  of  the 
most  crying  abuses  of  the  Church — the  right  of  absence, 
which  allowed  the  noble  titulary  of  a  benefice  to  enjoy 
in  the  capital,  or  where  he  pleased,  all  the  emoluments  of 
his  office,  and  to  turn  over  all  its  duties  and  labors  to  the 
miserable  substitute  whom  he  had  hired  for  a  mere  trifle. 
The  nobility  enjoyed  largely  the  high  places  of  the 
Church,  receiving  immense  incomes,  but  giving  in  return 
only  their  sounding  names.    The  clergy  who  did  the  work 
received  but  little  pay  and  lived  miserably.    Thus  the 
salaries  were  in  inverse  proportion  to  the  labor  performed. 
In  1785  the  scandalous  lawsuit  of  the  diamond  neck- 


INTRODUCTION. 


35 


lace  had  gravely  compromised  a  prince  of  the  Church. 
The  Cardinal  de  Rohan,  Bishop  of  Strasbourg,  and 
Grand  Almoner  of  France,  had  doubtless  been  duped 
by  the  intriguing  and  unworthy  Countess  de  Lamotte. 
She  had  persuaded  him  that  by  means  of  a  certain  very 
costly  ornament  he  would  be  able  to  obtain  the  favors 
of  the  Queen,  and  had  surreptitiously  procured  it  for 
him.    This  affair,  when  it  came  to  the  light,  and  was 
brought  into  the  courts  of  justice,  produced  a  profound 
impression  on  society.    The  world  saw  in  it  something 
worse  than  the  filching  of  a  diamond  necklace  ;  namely, 
its  use  by  a  prince  of  the  Church  for  such  a  purpose. 
When  we  recollect  that  all  the  infamous  laws  of  perse- 
cution of  Louis  XIY.  were  scrupulously  enforced  by  this 
nmsked  and  discredited  clergy;  that  with  sleek  faces1 
and  joking  lips  they  attempted  to  play  the  zealous 
heresy-hating  Dominican  of  the  Middle  Ages  without 
having  a  particle  tf  his  sincere  faith,  it  is  easy  to  con-^ 
ceive  the  contempt  into  which  they  fell  in  the  public 
mind.     The  condemnation  of  the  Protestant  fatherN^ 
Calas,  through  their  influence,  by  the  Parliament  of  Tou- 
louse, on  the  false  charge  of  having  hanged  his  son  for 
wishing  to  go  over  to  Catholicism,  gave  a  powerful  im- 
petus to  the  opposition  and  indignation.    In  the  year 
1761  the  eldest  son  of  this  unfortunate  man  had  been 
found  strangled  in  his  father's  own  house.    The  Catho- 
lics had  Calas  arrested  on  the  charge  of  having  himself 
committed  the  unnatural  deed  on  his  own  son.  Nu- 
merous witnesses  appeared  against  him.    It  was  impos- 
sible for  the  father  to  prove  a  negative,  and  it  was  in 
vain  that  he  appealed  to  the  facts  of  his  parental  ten- 


36 


INTRODUCTION. 


derness  for  his  children  ;  of  the  restless  melancholy  tem- 
perament of  his  deceased  son ;  of  his  not  having  opposed 
another  of  his  sons  who  had  gone  over  to  the  Catholics ; 
of  the  impossibility  of  his  committing  such  an  act  of 
violence  in  his  sixty-eighth  year  on  a  vigorous  young 
man ;  and  of  there  having  been  in  his  house  at  the  time 
a  Catholic  servant  girl,  who  yet  knew  nothing  of  his 
alleged  crime.  He  was  condemned  to  the  wheel  by 
eight  voices  against  five,  and  in  March,  1762,  put  to 
death.  He  endured  the  torture  with  calmness  and  pa- 
tience, and  on  mounting  the  scaffold  uttered  the  fol- 
lowing words  :  "  I  die  innocent ;  my  judges  have  been 
deceived.  Christ,  however,  who  was  innocence  itself, 
died  even  a  more  painful  death  than  mine."  The  re- 
maining members  of  the  family  removed  to  Geneva, 
where  Yoltaire  became  acquainted  with  them  and  with 
their  terrible  misfortune.  He  immediately  determined 
to  investigate  the  matter  thoroughly,  and  to  submit  it 
to  the  judgment  of  the  world.  The  iniquity  of  the 
affair  becoming  thus  notorious,  the  widow  and  children 
applied  for  a  revision  of  the  trial.  The  result  was  that 
fifty  judges,  after  a  thorough  investigation  of  all  the 
circumstances,  pronounced  the  father  entirely  innocent 
of  the  charge  -  for  which  he  had  suffered.  This  serv- 
ice of  Voltaire  in  the  cause  of  justice  was  a  terrible 
blow  to  the  Catholics ;  but  his  wrath  did  not  stop 
within  the  bounds  of  justice.  Seizing  every  plausible 
pretext,  he  increased  the  indignation  to  the  extent  of  his 
power. 

Thus  we  have,  near  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  cen- 
^    tury,  the  spectacle  of  two  great  irreconcilable  powers 


INTRODUCTION. 


37 


mutually  driving  each  other  to  the  last  extremes.  Tt  is 
easy  to  foresee  how  difficult  will  be  any  conciliation 
when  the  hour  for  great  social  reforms  arrives.  There 
had  gradually  arisen  in  the  minds  of  the  liberal  portion 
of  the  laity  an  unwillingness  to  allow  to  remain  on  the 
same  footing  the  vast  and  expensive  establishment  of 
the  Church.  True,  these  opinions  were  rather  insinu- 
ated than  openly  advocated.  Sometimes  it  was  by  way 
of  allusion,  as  when  Mably  discussed  the  origin  of  tithes 
and  of  the  property  of  the  Church ;  sometimes  by  sar- 
casm, as  when  Montesquieu  exposed  so  masterly  the 
uselessness  of  the  monastic  life ;  and  sometimes  by  the 
inexhaustible  and  terrible  raillery  of  Voltaire,  which 
attacked  even  the  bases  of  Christianity.  As  early  as 
1749  public  functionaries  had  maintained  the  right  of 
the  nation  to  lay  hands  on  the  property  of  the  Church 
for  the  good  of  the  public  treasury.  But  though  public 
opinion  so  strongly  disfavored  the  accumulation  of  so 
much  wealth  in  the  hands  of  the  clergy,  the  government 
manifested  no  inquietude.  France,  naturally  more  en- 
thusiastic for  ideas  than  for  individual  interests,  needed 
the  pressure  of  a  great  crisis  to  induce  her  to  interfere 
in  earnest  in  secularizing  the  property  of  the  Church. 

It  was  not  thus  with  the  second  object  of  the  public 
desire,  namely,  liberty  of  opinion.  This  the  new  gener- 
ation was  determined  to  have,  even  at  the  price  of 
overthrowing  the  former  social  fabric.  It  shall  be  to 
the  eternal  honor  of  Voltaire  to  have  truly  and  sin- 
cerely loved  tolerance.  I  am  not  sure  that  he  had  the 
fever  at  every  anniversary  of  the  massacre  of  St.  Bar- 
tholomew ;  I  do  not  know  that  any  one  felt  his  pulse 


38 


INTRODUCTION 


regularly  on  that  occasion ;  it  is  certain,  however,  that 
he  had  the  fever  of  the  soul  and  heart,  that  noble  fever 
of  an  unfeigned  indignation  against  the  crimes  of  intol- 
erance. It  is  false,  however,  to  attribute  to  him  the 
founding  of  the  doctrine  of  tolerance.  Not  to  mention 
the  first  apologists  of  Christianity,  who  are  so  pointed 
on  this  subject,  William  Penn  had  inscribed  the  doc- 
trine of  religious  toleration  at  rlie  head  of  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  State  he  had  founded  in  America  at  the  close 
of  the  preceding  century.  The  little  State  of  Rhode 
Island  had  honored  itself  with  the  most  intelligent 
.  practice  of  the  same  principle.  We  must  add  also  that 
only  in  America  had  it  been  embraced  in  all  its  conse- 
quences. In  France  the  boldest  and  freest  thinkers 
had  fettered  it  with  strange  restrictions. 

We  applaud  Montesquieu  for  putting  into  the  mouth 
of  a  young  Jewess  the  following  words  :  "  You  wish  us 
to  be  Christians,  and  you  are  not  such  yourselves.  The 
characteristic  of  truth  is  its  triumph  over  the  heart  and 
mind,  and  not  this  feebleness  which  you  admit  when 
you  attempt  to  force  it  on  others  by  punishment.  The 
chief  honor  of  a  religion  is  its  being  believed ;  that  of 
laws,  their  being  feared."  Instead  of  being  consist- 
ent with  these  noble  maxims,  however,  Montesquieu 
violates  them  himself  by  refusing  to  a  new  religion  the 
right  of  propagating  itself.  "  Inasmuch,"  says  he,  "  as 
scarcely  any  but  an  intolerant  religion  can  have  a  zeal 
to  propagate  itself  in  other  lands,  since  a  religion  which 
can  tolerate  others  has  little  of  the  missionary  spirit,  it 
would  be  well  for  the  government,  when  satisfied  with 
the  existing  religion,  not  to  permit  the  establishment  of 


INTRODUCTION.  39 

others.  When  it  is  equally  practicable  to  receive  or 
not  receive  a  new  religion  it  should  be  forbidden,  but 
that  which  is  already  established  should  be  tolerated." 
One  seems  to  hear  in  these  words  a  voice  from  the  age 
of  Trajan  and  Pliny  the  Younger.  Is  this  not  simply 
the  old  Roman  and  French  idea  of  a  religion  for  the 
State  and  for  the  public  order?  Montesquieu  adds, 
"When  the  laws  authorize  dhferent  religions  they 
should  also  oblige  them  to  tolerate  each  other.  They 
should  be  required  not  only  not  to  trouble  the  State,  but 
also  not  to  trouble  each  other."  Thus  religion  is  made 
to  exist  only  at  the  good  will  of  the  State  and  during  its 
good  pleasure. 

In  Rousseau*  this  germ  of  a  system  received  its  full 
development.  The  eccentric  citizen  of  Geneva  was 
surely  a  friend  of  tolerance.  He  had  learned  this  in 
severe  lessons  from  the  Parliament  of  Paris,  which  had 
ordered  the  public  burning  of  his  philosophical  romance 
Emile,  and  from  the  official  blasts  of  Beaumont  the 
anti-Jansenist  Archbishop  of  Paris.  It  was  Rousseau 
who  had  given  to  the  ancient  regime  the  most  terrible 
blow,  for  it  was  he  who  had  given  to  the  reformatory 
movement  his  earnest  passion,  and  to  the  young  genera- 
tion the  lire  which  raged  in  his  own  heart.  He  has  the 
sad  honor  of  having  molded  the  French  Revolution 
according  to  his  own  image.  By  his  writings  he  was 
the  ruling  spirit  in  its  most  violent  and  devastating  . 
period.  It  is  easy  to  perceive  the  influence  of  his  ideas 
on  the  organization  of  religion  in  the  acts  of  our  first 
national  assemblies.  His  Contra*  Social  contained  the 
*  See  Appendix,  note  2. 


40 


INTKODUCTION. 


formulae  which  by  them  were  made  into  laws.  Strange 
to  say,  this  chart  of  the  impending  revolution,  this  pro- 
gramme of  the  boldest  of  reforms,  was  full  of  the 
favorite  ideas  of  Bossuet.  It  was  a  sort  of  deistical 
Gallicanism,  with  a  very  short  catechism,  it  is  true,  but 
as  implacable  toward  its  foes  as  if  it  had  had  to  enforce 
the  creed  of  the  Council  of  Trent.  The  sword,  though 
drawn  for  so  feeble  a  formulary,  is  none  the  less  terri- 
ble against  all  dissenters.  The  Gontrat  Social  is,  so  to 
speak,  Louis  XIV.  in  a  Jacobin's  coat.  It  is  true,  the 
supreme  power,  instead  of  being  a  single  man,  is  called 
Legion.  Instead  of  at  Versailles,  it  presides  in  a  noisy 
forum;  but  it  is  none  the  less  absolute,  none  the  less 
destructive  of  all  real  freedom ;  it  is  a  pure  despot. 
Rousseau,  of  course,  desires  that  this  despot  be  a  good 
prince,  and  allow  all  his  fellow-citizens  to  believe  as 
they  please.  The  concession,  however,  is  very  small, 
for  it  does  not  permit  dissenters  to  manifest  publicly 
their  faith.  Let  Rousseau  speak  for  himself :  "  There  is 
a  profession  of  faith  purely  civil,  of  which  it  is  the  sov- 
ereign's duty  to  fix  the  articles,  without  obliging  any 
one  to  believe  in  them ;  but  he  may  banish  from  his 
State  whoever  does  not  believe  them.  He  may  banish 
him  not  as  impious,  but  as  unsocial,  incapable  of  sin- 
cerely loving  law  and  justice,  and  of  sacrificing,  if  need 
be,  his  life  to  his  duty.  If  any  one,  after  publicly 
recognizing  these  dogmas,  acts  as  if  not  believing  them, 
let  him  be  put  to  death  ;  he  has  committed  the  greatest 
of  crimes,  he  has  lied  against  the  laws." 

At  the  reading  of  these  words,  published  about  the 
year  17G4,  I  seem  to  see  in  the  distance  Robespierre 


INTRODUCTION.  41 

celebrating  the  festival  of  the  Eternal  in  the  presence  of 
the  guillotine.  Rousseau,  doubtless,  would  have  been 
first  in  detesting  the  practical  working  of  his  theory ; 
but  when  we  remember  that  it  was  his  doctrines  which 
had  done  most  in  educating  the  young  generation,  we 
can  easily  account  for  the  grievous  mistakes  which 
were  made  in  adapting  the  relations  of  the  State  to 
religion.  The  eloquent  teacher  had  poorly  instructed  his 
disciples  on  the  subject  of  liberty  of  conscience. 

What  we  have  above  said  of  the  moral  condition  of 
the  clergy  in  the  eighteenth  century,  explains  the  atti- 
tude they  took  as  to  the  property  of  the  Church,  and  as 
to  the  principle  of  tolerance.  In  1788  the  Assembly  of 
the  Clergy  was  called  to  vote  on  the  resolutions  of  the 
Assembly  of  Notables  which  levied  a  tax  on  all  lands, 
including  the  possessions  of  the  Church.  They  protested 
with  great  energy  against  a  project  which  seemed  to 
them  to  overthrow  .all  laws,  human  and  divine.  They 
declared  to  the  King  that  their  goods  had  been  irrevo- 
cably vowed  and  consecrated  to  God,  and  that  their  con- 
science and  honor  forbade  them  to  change  into  a  legal 
tribute,  what  could  only  be  their  free  gift  to  the  national 
treasury.  They  prayed  God  to  guard  their  ancient  im- 
munities against  the  license  of  revolutionary  opinions. 
Nor  were  their  feelings  as  to  the  liberty  of  the  press  any 
more  honorable.  From  1781  up  to  1789  they  had  done 
their  utmost  to  suppress  whatever  publications  attacked 
their  privileges. 

Worst  of  all  was  the  attitude  of  their  later  assemblies  . 

toward  the  Protestants.    The  persecuting  laws  of  Louis 

XIV.  were  still  retained.    A  Protestant  Pastor,  Francis 

6 


42 


INTRODUCTION. 


Pochette,  had  been  executed  in  1762,  and  the  judicial 
murder  of  Calas  belonged  to  the  same  epoch.    The  ex- 
plosion of  indignation  excited  by  this  crime,  and  its  elo- 
quent exposure  by  the  genius  of  Voltaire,  had  done 
more  for  the  Protestant  cause  than  a  half  century  of  ob- 
scure sufferings.    Men  did  not  yet  dare  to  demand  for 
it  toleration  as  a  religion,  but  they  were  at  least  ashamed 
of  the  entire  proscription  of  one  of  the  noblest  classes 
of  society.    For  some  years  the  magistrates,  shocked  at 
the  injustices  encouraged  by  the  lack  of  a  legal  recog- 
nition of  the  Protestants,  had  sought  in  divers  ways  to 
evade  the  difficulty.    The  friends  of  tolerance  pressed 
openly  for  a  legal  recognition,  if  not  of  Protestantism, 
at  least  of  the  Protestants  as  citizens.    The  great  states- 
man, Malesherbes,  had  drawn  up  on  the  subject,  in  1785, 
a  project  of  a  law.    In  the  Assembly  of  Notables,  in 
1787,  Lafayette,  who  had  breathed  the  air  of  liberty  in 
the  United  States,  took  the  initiative  in  a  formal  propo- 
sition which  resulted  in  an  edict  of  toleration.  Imperfect 
as  it  was,  it  was  hailed  with  the  warmest  satisfaction. 
It  declared  in  its  preamble  that  the  King  would  continue 
to  use  all  his  influence  in  the  interests  of  the  Catholic 
religion ;  it  provided  that  the  Roman  Catholic  religion 
alone  should  enjoy  the  right  of  public  worship ;  that 
non-Catholics  might  live  in  France  and  exercise  profes- 
sions or  trades  without  being  molested  on  account  of 
religion ;  that  they  might  be  legally  married  before  the 
officers  of  justice,  and  have  the  births  of  their  children 
•    regularly  registered;  that,  in  fine,  they  might  enjoy  the 
privileges  of  honorable  sepulture.    These  concessions, 
though  interfering  in  no  way  with  the  domination  of 


INTRODUCTION. 


43 


Catholicism,  met  with  the  intensest  opposition  from  the 
clergy.  Even  the  Parliament  of  Paris  made  some  ob- 
jection to  their  registration.  Espremenil,  holding  op  an 
image  of  Christ,  cried  out,  "  Will  yon  crucify  him 
afresh  !  "  But  nothing  responded  better  to  publiG  opin- 
ion than  these  concessions  to  the  persecuted,  now  that 
their  cause  had  been  pleaded  by  the  philosophers.  It 
had  needed  the  noise  of  a  public  discussion  to  render 
their  condition  a  subject  of  interest  to  France.  The 
high  clergy  alone  continued  their  protests.  At  the  cor- 
onation of  Louis  XVI.,  in  1775,  a  prelate,  less  known 
for  his  virtue  than  for  his  ambition,  Lomenie  de  Brienne, 
Archbishop  of  Toulouse,  had  assumed  to  address  the 
Monarch  thus:  "We  conjure  you,*Sire,  do  not  delay  to 
take  from  error  the  hope  of  having  among  us  temples 
and  altars.  It  is  reserved  to  you  to  strike  the  last  blow 
to  Calvinism  in  your  dominions.  Order  the  dispersion 
of  the  schismatic  meetings  of  the  Protestants ;  exclude 
them,  without  distinction,  from  all  public  functions,  and 
you  will  assure  to  your  subjects  the  unity  of  the  Chris- 
tian worship." 

From  the  accession  of  Louis  XVI.  on,  the  clergy,  in 
their  assemblies,  continued  to  rail  against  the  Protestants. 
In  a  report  presented  by  them  in  1789  we  find  these 
words:  "This  sect,  which  in  the  midst  of  its  ruins  pre- 
serves the  spirit  of  audacity  and  independence  which  it 
ha*-;  shown  from  the  beginning,  wishes  to  arrogate  for 
falsehood  the  rights  which  belong  only  to  the  truth." 
And  yet  all  the  rights  they  sought  were,  not  to  be 
treated  like  wild  beasts,  and  hunted  down  in  the  forests. 
"  This  sect,"  continues  the  report,  "  presumes  to  demand 


44 


INTRODUCTION. 


a  civil  and  religious  existence ;  hence  the  necessity  of 
vigorously  resisting  all  its  efforts."  The  Archbishop  of 
Aries  raised  a  more  authoritative  voice.  According  to 
him  both  country  and  Church  were  in  great  danger,  and 
he  uttered  the  cry  of  the  disciples  in  distress :  "  Lord, 
save  us  or  we  perish."  The  country  was  in  danger  for- 
sooth, for  some  Protestants  were  admitted  to  public 
offices.  This,  however,  does  not  hinder  the  good  Arch- 
bishop from  declaring  his  love  for  his  erring  brethren : 
"They  are  our  fellow-citizens  and  brethren.  We  will 
always  love  and  cherish  them.  Far  from  us  the  thought 
of  the  sword.  The  warfare  to  which  we  are  called  is 
purely  spiritual."  The  orator  forgot  the  winged  words 
which  Bossuet  charged,  in  his  funeral  eulogy  of  the  abom- 
inable persecutor  Letellier,  with  the  duty  of  conveying 
to  subsequent  ages  the  knowledge  of  the  exploits  of  this 
saintly  man  in  extirpating  heresy.  The  sabers  of  the 
dragoons  and  the  ax  of  the  executioner  would  not 
pass,  at  the  opening  of  the  French  Revolution,  for  the 
pacific  crosier.  The  Archbishop  protested  that  he  put 
all  his  confidence  in  the  touching  instructions  and  lumi- 
nous examples  of  the  Church.  Nevertheless  the  Assembly 
of  the  Clergy,  held  in  1788,  was  unwilling  to  dispense 
with  the  temporal  arm,  but  made  to  the  King  a  formal 
petition  to  revoke  his  edict  of  toleration.  This  was  its 
last  public  act,  and,  as  it  were,  its  will  and  testament. 
Happily  there  was  no  one  in  France  who  received  the 
legacy. 

We  have  not  cited  these  facts  to  throw  discredit  on 
the  ancient  Church  of  France.  Large  bodies  like  it  are 
slow  to  receive  light,  for  they  are  dominated  by  their 


INTRODUCTION".  45 

traditions.  The  more  we  study  history  the  more  are 
we  convinced  of  the  astonishing  facility  with  which 
human  nature  embraces  the  strangest  contradictions. 
It  is  ever  leavened  with  inconsistency.  The  noblest 
sentiments  exist  in  the  same  bosom  along  side  of  the 
most  pernicious  prejudices.  The  high  clergy  of  France 
embraced  more  than  one  enlightened  and  liberal  spirit ; 
as  a  body,  however,  they  labored  under  the  weight  of 
centuries  of  error. 

Having  thus  characterized  the  tendencies  which  were 
about  to  enter  into  conflict,  we  shall  not  be  surprised  at 
the  Revolution  which  broke  out  in  1789.  We  shall  often 
have  to  regret  that  their  opposition  was  not,  at  bottom, 
more  radical,  and  that  both  the  party  of  the  Church  and 
the  reform  party  acted  too  often  from  the  principle  of 
narrow  intolerance.  For,  the  reformers  were  often  guilty 
of  defending  the  cause  of  tolerance  by  intolerant  meas- 
ures, and  of  outraging  the  liberty  of  conscience  in  their 
opponents  under  pretext  of  serving  it  in  general.  On  the 
other  hand  the  Church  party,  assailed  in  their  interior 
sanctuary  and  in  the  sacred  rights  which,  in  their  pros- 
perity, they  had  not  respected  in  their  brethren,  arose 
through  opprobrium  and  persecution  to  an  unconscious, 
but  none  the  less  real,  defense  of  this  sacred  liberty 
against  the  despotism  of  the  civil  power  which  they  had 
once  themselves  used  against  the  Protestants. 

This  exposition  of  the  condition  of  the  French  priest- 
hood would  give  an  incorrect  idea  of  the  general  state 
of  the  Church,  if  we  spoke  only  of  the  higher  clergy.  It 
is  true,  the  nobility  held  all  the  high  and  lucrative  posi- 
tions, and  an   impulse  of  reform  was  then  prevalent 


46 


INTRODUCTION. 


among  the  aristocracy.  Some  of  their  number  had  taken 
part  in  the  glorious  work  of  the  American  Revolution. 
Nevertheless  this  had  not  shaken  the  ecclesiastical  preju- 
dices of  the  gentlemen  prelates.  They  all  remained  true 
thereto  with  the  exception  of  Pompignan,  Archbishop 
of  Vienne,  and  Talleyrand,*  Bishop  of  Autun ;  and  of 
these  the  latter  had  the  churchly  vocation  only  to  a  very 
feeble  degree.  But  it  was  not  so  with  the  lower  clergy. 
Poorly  paid,  and  held  in  subjection  to  their  superiors, 
these  were  in  a  state  of  perpetual  discontent.  Belonging 
mostly  to  that  energetic  and  wide-awake  middle  class, 
who  felt  that  the  time  of  their  disinthrallment  was 
dawning,  they  shared  in  the  same  feelings.  To  this 
number  belonged  the  still  remaining  Jansenists,  who 
were  already  predisposed  for  change,  inasmuch  as  for  a 
century  they  had  been  suffering  severely  at  the  hands 
of  the  State  Church.  Also  the  convents,  encumbered 
as  they  were  with  men  without  active  religious  duties, 
hid  in  their  cells  more  than  one  dangerous  agitator,  as 
yet  unknown  to  himself.  On  the  whole,  the  opinions  of 
the  inferior  clergy  were  not  beyond  a  firm  but  moderate 
liberalism,  at  least  in  the  center  and  east  of  France. 
The  west  and  the  south  were  still  imbued  with  the  preju- 
dices of  the  past.  It  was  an  Abbot,  namely,  Sieyes,f 
whose  eloquent  words  decided,  at  the  time  of  the  con- 
vocation of  the  States-General,  the  difficult  question  as 
t<»  the  manner  in  which  the  three  orders  should  be  rep- 
resented in  the  coming  National  Assembly.  Another  ol 
these  earnest  priests,  Abbot  Gouttes,  published  a  work 
<n  The  Injustice  of  the  Pretensions  of  the  Clergy  and 
*  See  Appendix,  note  3.  f  Ibid,  note  4. 


INTRODUCTION.  47 

Nobility.     Abbot  Pfcoot  published  letters  011  Political 
Liberty;  and  Abbot  Gregory,*  who  Mas  afterward  to 
play  so  noble  a  role,  issued  a  series  of  LcUert  to  Pari,/, 
Priests.    As  au  exeeptional  ease,  we  might  mention  the 
pamphlet  of  a  priest  of  Auxerre,  entitled  the  Gloria  in 
MboOms  of  the  People,  whieh  presented  in  embryo  all 
the  exeesses  of  the  spirit  of  Jacobinism.    Such  was  the 
state  of  public  opinion  on  the  religious  question  at  the 
moment  when  all  the  secret  aspirations  were  on  the  point 
of  bursting  into  active  attempts  at  practical  realization, 
without  meeting  any  other  obstacle  than  their  own  bitter 
rivalries.    The  Church  was  so  inwoven  in  the  State  that 
the  one  could  not  be  touched  without  affecting  the  other. 
We  shall  therefore  see,  from  the  very  outbreak  of  the 
Revolution,  the  question  of  Church  and  State  distinctly 
presenting  itself,  and  marching  through  manifold  perils 
and  mistakes  to  its  own  proper  solution. 

*  See  Appendix,  note  5. 


RELIGION 

AND  THE 

REIGN   OF  TERROR. 


BOOK  FIEST. 

THE  CONSTITUENT  ASSEMBLY. 


CHAPTER  L 

LEGISLATIVE    PRELIMINARIES  FIRST    DEBATE    ON  THE 

LIBERTY  OF  WORSIIIP. 

A  unique  hour  in  our  history  had  arrived.  France, 
in  seeing  herself  honored  "with  a  worthy  national  repre- 
sentation, felt  the  throbs  of  a  new  life.  She  saw  the 
future  in  the  brilliant  colors  of  that  May  sun  which 
saluted  the  opening  of  the  so  long  and  so  earnestly 
desired  States-General.  "  Despise  not  your  youth,"  said 
a  great  poet.  Let  us  likewise  respect  this  season  of  genu- 
ine enthusiasm  for  the  public  good.  It  had  sprung  up 
in  a  race  which  had  seemed  in  dotage.  Let  us  not 
deride  this  readiness  to  hope  for  every  thing,  this  un- 
limited confidence  in  the  future.  If  the  harvest  answers 
not  to  the  spring,  that  does  not  say  that  the  spring  was 
deficient  in  vigorous  sap.    Had  it  not  been  for  these 


50  Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

brilliant  illusions,  nothing  at  all  would  have  been  accom- 
plished, nothing  even  undertaken.  If  there  exists  to-day 
earnest  opposition  to  the  general  abasement,  generous 
aspirations  for  improvement,  it  is  because  something 
remains  of  the  illusions  of  IV 8 9.  They  remain,  after  all, 
the  ideal  of  our  history ;  and  the  moment  they  are  lost 
sight  of  by  the  public,  that  moment  the  condition  of  the 
nation  will  be  similar  to  that  of  falling  Rome. 

The  clergy  partook  largely  of  the  universal  enthu- 
siasm. The  Bishop  of  Nancy,  in  preaching  the  inaugu- 
ration sermon  of  the  States-General  in  a  church  at 
Versailles,  so  touched  the  chord  of  patriotism  as  to  be 
interrupted  by  cheers,  notwithstanding  the  sacredness 
of  the  place.  However,  from  the  very  first  day  it  was 
easy  to  observe  profound  differences  of  sentiment.  On 
several  weighty  points,  however,  there  was  general 
harmony,  such  as  the  equal  distribution  of  taxes,  the 
regular  assembling  of  the  States-General,  and  the  refor- 
mation of  the  abuses  of  the  feudal  system.  The  clergy 
were  liberal  on  every  subject  except  the  privileges  of 
the  Church.  M.  de  Tocqueville,  in  saying  that  they 
were  fully  as  favorable  to  civil  liberty  and  political 
rights  as  the  members  of  the  Third  Estate,  doubtless 
goes  too  far,  and  attributes  to  them  as  a  body  what 
belonged  only  to  certain  sections  of  them.  Neverthe- 
less it  is  true  that  as  to  politics  they  fell  behind  none  in 
liberalism,  and  were  in  advance  of  the  nobility.  Still 
they  were  much  divided  on  the  question  as  to  whether 
the  voting  in  the  Assembly  should  be  by  individuals 
instead  of  by  orders.  To  their  honor  be  it  said,  that 
they  insisted  earnestly  on  Jhe  suppression  of  slavery 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  51 

and  the  slave-trade.  But  there  was  great  variety  of 
sentiment  on  important  subjects.  The  representatives 
of  the  high  clergy  generally  insisted  on  the  divine  right 
of  kings,  while  those  coming  from  among  the  pariah 
priests  invariably  pleaded  the  rights  of  the  people. 

But  even  the  high  clergy  were  divided.    While  the 
Archbishop  of  Lyons  spoke  only  of  the  anarchical  and 
subversive  tendency  of  the  new  ideas,  the  Bishop  of 
Blois  offered  the  half  of  his  income  to  the  public  treas- 
ury, and  the  Archbishop  of  Bordeaux  preached  self- 
sacrifice  to  the  great,  and  concord  to  all    But  this 
liberalism  did  not  extend  to  a  recognition  of  the  liberty 
of  conscience.    The  clergy  insisted  on  the  necessity  of 
maintaining  the  Catholic  as  the  religion  of  the  State, 
and  demanded  a  priestly  surveillance  of  the  press.' 
They  favored  reforms  in  the  education  of  the  youth, 
but   insisted   that   it   be   confided   to   the  Church.' 
While  admitting  the  need  of  reforming  the  discipline 
of  the  convents,  they  insisted  on   maintaining  the 
monastic  orders.    Certainly  these  views  were  widely 
different  from  those  of  the  Third  Estate.    In  the  elec- 
tion of  many  of  the  deputies  to  this  body,  an  anti- 
Church  feeling  had  openly  prevailed.    At  the  Paris 
election  the  cry  was  heard  on  every  hand,  "  No  more  f 
priests  !    No  more  priests  !  "    The  opinions  of  the  Paris 
delegation  were  very  pointed.    They  held  that,  religion 
being  a  matter  of  persuasion  and  not  of  force,  every 
citizen  should  be  free  to  choose  his  own  Church  ;  that 
the  sending  of  Peter-pence  to  Rome  should  be  stopped; 
that  every  Church  dignitary  should  live  in  the  bounds 
of  his  official  district;  that  plurality  of  benefices  should 


52         Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror, 

be  forbidden ;  and  that  thenceforth  monastic  vows 
should  not  bind  devotees  to  remain  in  their  convents. 
Principles  so  widely  discordant  as  these,  were  destined 
to  break  out  in  the  Assembly  in  open  conflict. 

The  expenditures  of  Louis  XIV.,  and  the  improvidence 
of  the  government  since  his  death,  had  brought  the 
nation  to  the  brink  of  bankruptcy  and  ruin.  As  a  last 
expedient  it  was  decided  to  summon  a  meeting  of  the 
States-General,  a  body  which  had  not  been  called  to- 
gether since  the  year  1614.  This  body  consisted  of 
delegates  from  the  three  orders  of  society — the  nobility, 
the  clergy,  and  the  people,  or  Third  Estate.  The  dele- 
gates of  the  people  numbered  a  few  more  than  the 
sum  of  those  from  the  other  two  classes.  The  As- 
sembly convened  at  Versailles  in  the  beginning  of 
May,  1789. 

An  all  important  question  now  arose,  namely,  How 
should  the  members  of  the  Assembly  vote  ?  Should  it 
be  by  orders,  or  by  individuals  ?  Should  the  noble,  the 
priest,  and  the  deputy  of  the  people  stand  on  an  equality 
in  privilege  and  power,  or  should  each  order  vote  sep- 
arately ?  If  the  latter,  then  farewell  to  all  hope  of 
effectual  reform,  for  no  measure  could  pass  without  the 
vote  of  at  least  one  of  the  privileged  orders.  The  Third 
Estate  would,  therefore,  be  powerless,  inasmuch  as  the 
two  orders  of  the  nobility  and  clergy  could  combine 
and  defeat  all  its  measures.  The  question  was,  there- 
fore, one  of  life  and  death.  The  existence  of  the  estab- 
lished order  of  things  depended  on  its  decision.  Should 
the  demand  of  the  Commons  for  a  union  of  the  three 
orders  be  acceded  to,  then  every  thing  would  be  in 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  53 

their  power,  for  they  were  in  the  majority.     It  was 
natural  that  ancient  France  was  not  willing  to  die 
without  a  struggle.    Though  tl*  nobility  and  clergy 
were  willing,  under  the  pressure  of  the  times,  to  cut  oil" 
from  the  old  oak  all  excrescences  and  parasitical^ 
branches,  still  they  were  by  no  means  favorable  to  tear-1 
ing  it  out  by  the  roots.    The  union  of  the  orders  was 
especially  distasteful  to  the  clergy.    The  spirit  of  the 
constitution  of  the  priesthood  was  a  principle  of  isola- 
tion.   Based  on  the  order  of  the  Levites,  they  felt 
themselves  to  be  separated  from  the  laity  in  every 
respect— in  their  office,  in  their  property,  even  in  their 
garments.    To  bow  under  the  sway  of  the  common  law, 
and  to  debate  their  rights  with  laymen,  was  to  abandon 
all  their  cherished  notions  of  special  privilege.  It 
would,  therefore,  be  unjust  to  condemn  their  long  hesi- 
tation before  consenting  to  a  fusion  of  the  orders.  This 
step,  however,  they  were  finally  compelled  to  take. 

During  the  weeks  of  contest  which  preceded  the 
fusion,  the  Third  Estate  gave  proof  of  consummate 
political  genius.  They  aimed  at  a  definite  point,  and 
were  ready  to  yield  in  any  thing  that  was  not  essential 
to  their  object.  When  it  became  necessary,  they  exhib- 
ited a  sublime  and  heroic  force  of  detennination.  Such 
was  the  hour  when,  shut  out  of  the  former  place  oi 
meeting,  they  assembled  in  the  empty  saloon  of  a  tennis- 
court,  and,  raising  their  hands,  took  a  solemn  vow  not 
to  separate  till  they  had  given  the  nation  a  new  consti- 
tution. They  were  more  fortunate  than  their  privilege.! 
brethren,  moreover,  in  having  j,  their  ranks  the  prince 
of  modern  orators— one  who,  despite  his  vice,  wa 


54:         Eeligion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

abreast  with  the  noble  enthusiasm  of  the  time,  and 
whose  winged  words  were  like  lightning  flashes  in  the 
faces  of  his  foes.  Mifabeau*  was  an  intellectual  king, 
and  dominated  in  the  Assembly  by  the  divine  right  of 
genius. 

The  victory  of  the  Third  Estate  was  certain  from  the 
first  day.    They  were  united,  while  their  opponents 
were  divided.    On  the  first  vote  a  large  minority  of  the 
clergy  favored  the  fusion  of  the  orders.    As  this  minor- 
ity, however,  contained  only  three  Bishops,  it  is  clear 
that  it  consisted  chiefly  of  the  inferior  clergy.  The 
majority  itself  was  less  firm  in  resistance  than  the  no- 
bility.   They  treated  the  delegations  which  were  sent 
to  them  from  the  Third  Estate  with  deference  and 
respect;  still  they  could  not  turn  aside  the  inevitable 
democratic  drift  of  things,  which  everywhere  stared 
them  in  the  face.    Xo  stroke  of  policy  or  cunning  was 
left  untried.    The  most  ingenious  of  all  was  the  attempt 
to  carry  their  point  by  surprise.    Prices  of  food  were 
enormously  high,  and  the  people  in  some  places  were 
on  the  point  of  famine.    What  could  therefore  seem 
more  patriotic  than,  for  a  season,  to  adjourn  their  long 
political  dissensions  and  attend  at  once  to  the  furnishing 
of  bread  to  the  starving  ?    Accordingly,  under  pretext 
of  attending  to  this  duty  of  charity,  the  body  of  the 
clergy  voted  unanimously,  on  the  sixth  of  June,  to  ap- 
point a  committee  to  take  into  consideration  the  scarcity 
of  grain,  and  invited  the  other  two  bodies  to  second 
them  in  this  good  work.    Doubtless  the  minority  voted 
for  this  measure  with  perfect  honesty  and  patriotism ; 
*  See  Appendix,  note  G. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  55 

as  to  the  majority,  however,  it  is  perfectly  evident  that 
it  was  a  cunning  design  to  avoid  the  fusion  of  the  orders 
by  surprising  them  in  advance  into  separate  action. 
The  scheme  could  not  succeed.  Bailly,  the  wise  presi- 
dent of  the  Third  Estate,  replied  to  the  proposition  as 
follows  :  "  The  most  ardent  wish  of  the  deputies  of  the 
people  is  to  procure  them  relief.  The  resolution  of  the 
clergy  justifies  them  in  believing  that  that  order  shares 
with  them  in  this  wish,  and  Will  therefore  not  long  delay 
to  unite  in  a  body  with  them,  without  which  union  the 
public  distress  must  go  on  increasing  forever."  Thus, 
beaten  on  their  own  ground,  the  higher  clergy  looked 
elsewhere  for  help,  and  urged  the  King  to  despotic 
action.  But  fresh  chagrin  awaited  them  here.  Com- 
missioners had  been  appointed  by  the  three  orders  to 
confer  with  those  of  the  King,  but  their  deliberations 
resulted  in  little.  By  this  time  the  spirit  of  the  hour 
had  so  far  made  progress  among  the  clergy  as  to  gain  a 
majority.  This  majority  now  resolved  on  the  first  occa- 
sion to  put  their  views  into  practice. 

A  royal  session  took  place  June  23.  The  King,  sur- 
rounded by  all  the  pomp  of  royalty,  appeared  in^  the 
Assembly,  expressed  much  displeasure  at  the  obstinacy 
of  the  Commons,  made  sundry  threats  to  provide  for 
the  good  of  the  nation  without  their  help  if  they  per- 
sisted in  making  trouble,  enjoined  the  continuance  of 
the  separate  action  of  the  three  orders,  and  on  retiring 
ordered  the  Assembly  to  disperse.  The  nobility  and 
clergy  obeyed,  but  the  Commons  retained  their  scats. 
"That  day,"  says  Mignet,  "the  royal  authority  was 
lost."    It  was  successfully  disobeyed.    "  The  Assembly 


56  Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

remained,"  said  Sieyes,  "  what  it  had  been  from  the  first, 
that  is,  sovereign."  The  proud  words  of  Mirabeau  de- 
clared that  the  new  right  was  stronger  than  the  old.  The 
King,  urged  on  by  the  higher  clergy  and  the  nobility,  had 
gone  too  far,  and  lost  every  thing.  It  was  in  vain  that, 
in  conformity  with  his  direction,  they  persisted  in  meet- 
ing separately.1  Within  a  day  or  so  the  majority  of  the 
clergy  and  a  large  number  of  the  nobility  had  joined 
the  Commons,  and  the  King,  under  the  pressure  of 
public  opinion,  ordered  the  remaining  ones  to  do  like- 
wise. 

The  disaffected  members  of  the  clergy  sought  to  pro- 
vide for  the  future  by  protesting  against  the  union  they 
had  reluctantly  consented  to.  This  was  met  by  the  with- 
ering words  of  Mirabeau,  that  no  one  could  be  a  member 
of  the  Assembly  who  did  not  recognize  its  sovereignty. 
The  former  system  of  things  had  passed  away.  The  only 
authority  remaining  consisted  in  the  sovereignty  of  a  de- 
liberative assembly.  By  the  27th  of  June,  we  may  say, 
the  Revolution  was  consummated.  Nothing  of  a  more 
radical  nature  remained  to  be  done  than  had  already 
been  accomplished. 

As  regards  the  Church  of  France,  the  changes  were 
of  a  deep  and  wide-reaching  nature.  It  was  no .  longer 
an  isolated  order  in  the  bosom  of  the  State.  Its  organi- 
zation was  now  to  fall  under  the  criticism  and  direction, 
not  of  its  own  ministers,  but  of  the  deputies  of  the 
nation.  The  great  danger  was  that  in  the  confusion  of 
the  temporal  and  spiritual  spheres,  the  sanctity  of  the 
conscience  might  be  violated. 

As  to  the  National  Assembly,  it  seemed  that  it  now  had 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Toror.  57 

nothing  further  to  do  than  to  enter  on  its  great  work  of 
preparing  a  constitution  for  France.    But  it  was  neces- 
sary, first  of  all,  to  provide  for  its  own  safety.    At  this 
point  a  dangerous  power  came  to  its  protection.  This 
was  the  power  of  the  populace,  the  mob.    We  do  not 
censure  all  uprisings  of  the  people;  they  are  sometimes 
sublime  and  of  good  result.    But  in  the  state  of  the 
ignorance  of  the  masses  at  the  close  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  these  explosions  of  public  sentiment  had  the 
character  of  savage  and  intractable  forces.    The  in- 
structed classes  breathe  the  fire  of  a  legitimate  indigna- 
tion into  the  hearts  of  the  brawny-armed  masses,  and 
imagine  that  they  will  stop  their  violence  at  the  proper 
bounds  ;  but  this  is  rarely  the  case.    The  mad  waves  of 
wrath  roll  higher  and  higher,  until  both  friends  and  foes 
are  submerged  in  the  general  wreck.    Moderate  liber- 
ahsts  will  always  perish  in  the  impure  waters  of  dema- 
gogism,  so  long  as  they  will  not  be  wise  enough  to 
busy  themselves  fraternally  with  the  elevation  of  the 
masses  in  times  of  peace.    It  is  the  just  chastisement  of 
their  careless  selfishness.    Such  is  the  great  lesson  to  be 
learned  from  the  stormy  beginnings  of  the  French  Inv- 
olution.   Certainly,  when  foreign  troops  were  in  camp 
at  Versailles,  ready  brutally  to  disperse  the  National 
Parliament,  it  was  right  to  seek  protection  in  the  popu- 
lace of  Paris;  but  the  same  element  which  saved  the 
Assembly  was  destined   afterward  to  constrain  and 
crush  it.    The  despotism  of  the  street,  once  called  into 
play,  stopped  not  till  it  was  the  ruling  power  of  the 
■Wtaon.     We  applaud  the  people  who  destroyed  the 
Bastile;  but  it  u-ms  the  >;1.ne  people  that  afterward  rev- 


58  Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

eled  at  the  foot  of  the  guillotine.  We  will  see  that  the 
influence  of  the  mob  was  never  more  imperious  than  at 
the  time  when  the  question  of  religion  was  discussed  in 
the  National  Assembly. 

Not  that  the  people  of  Paris,  at  the  opening  of  the 
Revolution,  were  hostile  toward  religion.  On  the  con- 
trary, they  even  mingled  with  the  taking  of  the  Bastile 
a  vein  of  'religious  zeal.  In  destroying  a  prison  which 
stood  in  connection  with  a  convent,  the  mob  spared  the 
Sisters  of  Charity  and  respected  their  character.  Irre- 
ligious passion  was  so  far  from  being  yet  excited,  that 
after  the  victory  of  the  Bastile  the  people  of  Paris  com- 
mitted the  opening  Revolution  to  the  patronage  of  St. 
Genevieve.  They  made  a  religious  procession  in  grati- 
tude to  God  for  his  help.  Men,  women,  and  children 
flocked  with  garlands  and  votive  offerings  to  the  tomb 
of  the  patroness  of  Paris.  The  citizens  of  the  faubourg 
St.  Antoine  repaired  to  church  preceded  by  young  ladies 
in  white  and  a  large  number  of  the  clergy,  and  piously 
celebrated  funeral  services  for  those  who  had  fallen  at 
the  Bastile.  These  dispositions,  it  is  true,  soon  changed ; 
but  they  show  that  at  this  point  the  hostility  which  was 
afterward  so  bitter  against  religion,  and  so  destructive 
to  liberty,  had  not  yet  penetrated  the  masses. 

The  night  of  the  4th  of  August  will  remain  forever  a 
glorious  epoch  in  our  history.  It  presented  to  the  world 
an  unprecedented  example  of  patriotic  enthusiasm  and 
noble  self-sacrifice — we  might  call  it  a  sort  of  worldly 
Pentecost — so  sudden  and  so  great  was  the  change.  It 
presented  the  French  character  in  one  of  its  brightest, 
but  also  most  perilous  aspects.    The  nobility  and  high 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  59 

clergy  vied  with  each  other  in  sacrificing  on  the  altar  of 
the  country  the  privileges  they  had  enjoyed  from  time 
immemorial.  The  scene  was  sublime ;  still  we  cannot 
forget  that  it  is  not  by  such  exhibitions  of  momentary 
devotion  that  permanent  changes  are  generally  brought 
about  in  society.  What  one  hour  can  do,  another  hour 
may  undo.  Despite  all  this,  however,  the  night  of  the 
4th  of  August  remains  an  admirable  moment. 

The  nobility  had  just  renounced  their  feudal  rights 
and  privileges.  Then  the  Bishop  of  Nancy  arose  to 
speak  for  the  clergy.  He  declared  that  if  any  redemp- 
tion was  given  in  exchange  for  the  privileges  they  were 
about  to  relinquish  to  the  nation,  it  was  his  wish  that  it 
should  not  be  to  the  profit  of  the  ecclesiastical  proprietor, 
but  rather  that  it  should  be  used  as  a  public  fund,  in 
feeding  and  clothing  the  destitute.  After  him,  the  Bishop 
of  Chartres  demanded  the  abolition  of  the  laws  of  the 
chase.  The  generous  Gregory  proposed  the  abrogation 
of  the  annats,  an  occasional  tribute  heretofore  paid  to 
the  Pope.  Several  priests  offered  to  the  country  the 
whole  of  their  incomes.  This  grand  session  was  termi- 
nated by  an  approval  of  the  proposition  of  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Paris  to  sing  a  Te  Deum  in  the  chapel  of  the 
King.  It  was  fitting  that  the  name  of  God  should  be 
pronounced  at  the  close  of  such  a  session.  All  that  is 
grand  or  noble  is  from  him.  His  breath  had  brooded 
over  an  assembly,  the  majority  of  whom  were  far  from 
belie ving  in  his  providence. 

The  clergy  were  scarcely  aware  of  the  gravity  of  the 
events  just  accomplished.  This  lay  not  so  much  in  the 
Facrifices  they  had  already  made,  as  in  the  fact  that  the 


60         Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

whole  question  of  the  Church  property  was  intimately 
connected  with  questions  already  settled.  The  clergy 
had  unconsciously  submitted  the  whole  subject  to  the 
arbitration  of  a  deliberative  assembly.  The  day  after 
the  memorable  session  of  August  the  4th,  the  question 
of  tithes  presented  itself  in  all  its  difficulties.  It  is  true 
they  were  included  among  the  other  exceptional  taxes 
which  had  been  renounced  forever;  but  the  question 
remained,  whether  the  renunciation  was  to  be  understood 
as  absolute,  or  whether  the  tithes  were  to  be  redeemed 
in  money  or  otherwise.  Many  of  the  clergy  were  of  the 
latter  opinion.  Much  troublesome  discussion  arose  on 
the  subject.  Finally  Deputy  Buzot  arose  and  uttered 
the  following  insolent  words :  "  The  best  thing  the  clergy 
can  do  is  to  save  appearances,  and  to  seem  to  make,  of 
their  own  accord,  the  heavy  sacrifices  which  imperative 
circumstances  will  force  upon  them."  Mirabeau  pro- 
nounced, on  the  occasion,  one  of  his  finest  speeches,  in 
favor  of  the  unconditional  abolition  of  the  tithes,  and 
of  the  direct  payment  of  the  ministers  of  religion  out  of 
the  general  treasury.  He  was  ably  responded  to  by 
Sieves,  who,  however,  could  not  gain  the  majority. 
Finally  the  clergy  saw  that  their  cause  was  hopelessly 
lost.  They  yielded,  and  made  the  necessitated  renuncia- 
tion by  the  mouth  of  the  venerable  Archbishop  of  Paris. 
His  words  were  worthy  and  noble.  "  We  remit,"  said 
he,  "  all  these  ecclesiastical  tithes  into  the  hands  of  a 
generous  and  just  nation.  That  the  Gospel  be  preached, 
that  divine  worship  be  celebrated  with  dignity  and  pro- 
priety, and  that  the  poor  be  provided  for,  these  are  the 
objects  of  our  ministry.    We  have  confidence  in  the  Na- 


Rdigion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  01 

tional.  Assembly."  To  imagine  that  the  Church  property 
could,  after  this,  be  saved  to  any  degree  whatever,  was 
the  most  vain  delusion — the  cause  was  lost  before  the 
battle. 

Let  us  terminate  this  chapter  by  a  review  of  the  opin- 
ions of  the  Constituent  Assembly  as  to  the  liberty  of  con- 
science. The  subject  came  up  in  connection  with  the  dec- 
laration of  the  rights  of  man.  The  work  of  framing  a 
constitution  would  not  have  been  in  harmony  with  the 
French  genius  had  it  not  been  prefaced  by  a  chapter  of 
philosophical  generalities.  One  would  suppose  it  to  have 
been  more  necessary  to  enact  good  practical  laws  than  to 
proclaim  abstract  rights,  which  are  never  a  barrier  to 
tyranny.  Such  a  document  has,  moreover,  the  disadvan- 
tage of  reducing  past  history  to  an  abstraction,  and  of 
taking  too  little  account  of  circumstances.  It  would  have 
been  better  to  follow  the  sentiment  of  Mirabeau,  who  said, 
"  Liberty  is  never  the  fruit  of  principles  drawn  from  met- 
aphysical axioms,  but  rather  of  such  as  are  drawn  from 
the  experience  of  daily  life."  But  it  was  not  to  be  ex- 
pected that  philosophy,  which  had  made  the  Revolution, 
would  retire  from  the  field  the  very  day  of  its  own  tri- 
umph. However,  when  the  wor£  of  prefacing  the  con- 
stitution with  these  abstract  rights  was  once  undertaken, 
it  would  have  been  better,  as  Gregory  reminded  the 
Assembly,  to  make  the  work  complete,  and  to  remember, 
that  "  man  was  not  cast  into  the  world  by  chance ;  that 
if  he  has  rights,  it  would  be  well  to  speak  of  Him  who 
gave  them ;  and  that  if  he  has  duties,  some  mention 
should  be  made  of  Him  who  has  established  them."  The 
declaration  of  rights  was  incomplete,  and  even  dan- 


62  Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

gerous,  without  the  declaration  of  duties.  It  was  silent 
as  to  the  rights  of  God.  It  was  an  attempt  to  be  free 
without  being  just.  If  it  is  objected  that  a  declaration 
of  duties  would  have  approached  too  closely  the  domain 
of  religion,  we  answer,  That  is  true.  The  safer  way  is, 
for  political  assemblies  to  abstain  entirely  from  such 
philosophical  abstractions.  Their  tendency  is  generally 
evil. 

We  are  astonished,  however,  that  these  abstract  state- 
ments should  be  so  ambiguous  on  the  point  of  the 
rights  of  conscience.  But  our  astonishment  ceases  as 
soon  as  we  reflect,  on  the  one  hand,  on  the  influence 
of  Bossuet  on  the  opinions  of  the  clerical  members, 
and,  on  the  other,  on  that  of  Rousseau  on  the  philo- 
sophical party.  The  words  of  the  declaration  of  rights 
which  relate  to  the  general  subject  of  religion  were  as 
follows :  "  The  law  not  being  able  to  take  cognizance  of 
secret  wrongs,  it  is  for  religion  and  morality  to  supply 
the  defect.  It  is  therefore  essential  for  the  good  order 
of  society  that  both  be  respected.  The  existence  of  a 
religion  requires  a  public  worship.  Respect  for  the 
public  worship  is  therefore  indispensable.  Every  citizen 
who  does  not  disturb  the  established  worship  should  be 
unmolested."  This  statement  admits  one  national  re- 
ligion, and  only  one.  The  vague  reserve  as  to  non-mo- 
lestation was,  in  no  respect,  protection  to  dissenters.  It 
was  the  application  to  Catholicism  of  the  principles  of 
the  Contrat  Social.  The  high  clergy  were  very  well 
satisfied.  A  bishop,  in  expressing  his  pleasure,  observed 
that  "religion  is  the  basis  of  empires,"  and  cited  the 
words  of  Plutarch,  that  "  it  would  be  easier  to  build  a. city 


lid  iy  ion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  63 

in  tlit'  air  than  to  found  a  republic  on  any  other  principle 
than  the  worship  of  the  gods."  A  lay  deputy,  La  Borde, 
understanding  the  full  drift  of  these  words,  uttered  his 
earnest  protest.  "  I  avow,"  said  he,  "  that  I  am  afflicted 
at  seeing  Christians  invoking  the  civil  power  in  behalf 
of  a  religion  which  should  be  maintained  only  by  the 
purity  of  its  doctrine.  Surely,  earthly  powers  have 
nothing  to  do  with  religion.  Liberty  of  religion  is  a 
right  of  every  citizen.  Let  us  respect  other  worships, 
that  our  own  may  be  respected  in  return.  Our  worship 
should  in  no  way  interfere  with  the  exercise  of  other  re- 
ligions." But  the  Assembly  was  not  yet  ripe  for  such 
opinions.  At  this  point  the  powerful  words  of  Mirabeau 
came  to  the  aid  of  the  good  cause.  The  objectionable 
articles  were  rejected.  M.  de  Castellane  proposed  to  sub- 
stitute the  following:  "  No  man  shall  be  disturbed  for  his 
religious  opinions,  nor  troubled  in  the  exercise  of  his  wor- 
ship." This  excited  a  violent  opposition  on  the  part  of 
the  Conservatives  and  Catholics,  but  it  was  bravely  de- 
fended by  Mirabeau  and  others.  One  of  the  most  touch- 
ing incidents  of  the  debate  was  the  appearance  at  the  tri- 
bune of  Rabaud  St.  Etienne,*  the  worthy  son  of  the  heroic 
and  persecuted  Protestant  minister,  Paul  Rabaut,  When 
he  spoke  the  words,  "  I  am  the  representative  of  a  great 
people,"  one  seemed  to  hear  in  him  the  voice  of  that 
vast  multitude  of  Protestants  who  for  ages  had  been 
oppressed,  imprisoned,  banished,  and  often  put  to  death, 
by  a  State  Church  and  an  intolerant  clergy.  "  He  who 
attacks  the  liberty  of  others,"  said  Rabaut,  "deserves  to 
live  in  slavery.  A  worship  is  a  dogma;  a  dogma  is  a 
*  Set-  Appendix,  note  7. 


64         Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

matter  of  opinion,  and  opinions  should  be  free.  In- 
structed by  the  long  and  bloody  experience  of  the  past, 
it  is  time,  finally,  to  break  the  unnatural  barriers  which 
separate  man  from  man,  Frenchman  from  Frenchman." 
He  honored  himself  by  joining  to  the  cause  of  his  own 
people  that  of  the  Jews.  He  concluded  with  the  words, 
"  My  country  is  free ;  let  her  show  herself  worthy  by  ac- 
cording equal  rights  to  all  her  children." 

The  Assembly  closed  the  discussions  by  adopting  an 
ambiguous  half-way  measure.  It  was  to  this  effect : 
"  No  one  shall  be  disturbed  for  his  opinions,  even  re- 
ligious ones,  if  their  manifestation  does  not  disturb  the 
public  order  established  by  law?''  Mirabeau  expressed 
his  displeasure  at  this  resolution  in  a  vehement  news- 
paper article :  "  We  cannot  dissimulate  our  sadness 
that  the  National  Assembly,  instead  of  smothering  in- 
tolerance in  the  germ,  has  placed  it  among  the  articles 
of  the  declaration  of  rights.  Restrictive  laws  in  matters 
of  religion  are  absurd  in  themselves,  for  they  require 
men  of  different  intelligence  to  see  evidence  in  the  same 
dogmas,  and  truth  in  the  same  doctrines.  Such  laws 
are  immoral ;  they  create  corrupt  men  who  traffic  in 
their  faith.  They  are  impious.  What  greater  impiety 
than  to  interpose  between  man  and  God,  and  say  to 
man, '  We  forbid  you  to  worship  in  this  or  that  manner 
and  to  God,-*  We  forbid  you  to  receive  homage  offered 
under  any  other  form  than  our  own  ? '  "  But  we  will  not 
quote  further.  The  great  orator  did  his  work  earnestly 
and  well,  but  in  vain.  Many  of  the  abuses  he  exposed 
are  still  prevalent  in  France. 

We  have  now  finished  what  we  had  to  say  on  the 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  65 

treatment  of  the  Church  question  in  the  first  period  of 
the  Constituent  Assembly.  Most  surely  the  majority  of 
that  great  body  was  animated  by  a  true  love  of  liberty. 
Would  to  Heaven  that  this  love  had  been  as  intelligent 
as  it  was  ardent  and  sincere !  The  results  obtained 
were  very  important.  The  Church  was  no  longer  a 
separate  order  in  the  State,  partial  tolerance  was  in- 
scribed on  the  frontispiece  of  the  constitution ;  but 
neither  the  independence  of  the  Church  nor  the  liberty 
of  conscience  had  been  truly  understood  or  guaranteed. 
These  first  errors  were  destined  to  react  in  a  most  in- 
jurious manner  on  the  deliberations  of  the  succeeding 
year  as  to  the  organization  of  the  Church. 
.  9 


66         Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 


* 

CHAPTER  II. 

DISCUSSION   ON  THE  PROPERTY   OF  THE    CLERGY  ATTI- 
TUDE OF  THE  DIFFERENT  PARTIES  SUPPRESSION  OF 

THE  RELIGIOUS  ORDERS. 

The  reforms  already  made  in  Church  matters  naturally- 
led  to  others  of  a  more  radical  character,  so  much  the 
more  as  the  legislators  of  1789  were  governed,  not  by 
precedent,  but  by  abstract  principles.  This  method  of 
procedure,  so  different  from  that  of  the  English,  leads 
often  to  chimerical  and  impracticable  measures.  The 
Church  was  the  greatest  proprietor  of  fiefs  in  the  king- 
dom ;  she  fell,  therefore,  under  the  influence  of  all  the 
new  laws  which  weakened  and  abrogated  the  feudal 
•  system.  We  must  also  take  into  account  the  financial 
distress  of  the  nation.  Every  hour  was  bringing  the 
country  nearer  the  gulf  of  bankruptcy.  The  nation  had 
in  its  hands  an  immense  property,  the  title  to  which 
was  not  fully  settled. .  Every  temptation  was,  therefore, 
inciting  the  Constituent  Assembly  to  examine  the  title 
of  this  property;  and,  if  possible,  to  obtain  it  for  the 
relief  of  the  national  treasury. 

To  a  better  understanding  of  the  debates  on  this  sub- 
ject let  us  notice  the  condition  of  the  Church  property 
I  under  the  ancient  monarchy.    The  primitive  Church,  in 
;  the  heroic  age  of  persecutions,  lived  simply  but  glo- 
riously from  the  free  gifts  of  the  saints,  content  with 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  67 

what  was  strictly  necessary,  and  seeking  abundance] 
only  in  order  to  increase  its  acts  of  charity.  These 
unconstrained  donations  amounted  to  large  sums  as 
soon  as  the  Gospel  obtained  footing  in  large  places,  like 
Alexandria,  Carthage,  and  Rome.     With  Constantine 
Christianity  became  an  official  religion,  with  rights  of 
proprietorship,  and  was  the  recipient  of  imperial  dona- 
tions,   it  soon  began  to  receive  rich  heritages  from 
dying  saints.    Augustine  cries  out  against  the  undue 
persuasion,  so  commonly  practiced  even  in  his  day,  to 
obtain  testamentary  gifts.    It  is  well  known  how  favor- 
able to  the  increase  of  the  wealth  of  the  Church  were 
the  fears  of  an  approaching  end  of  the  world,  about  the 
year  1000.    It  seemed  very  convenient  to  escape  the  • 
wrath  of  God  by  gifts  of  lands,  which  the  fires  of  the  j 
last  judgment  were-  soon  to  consume.    The  develop-  ' 
ment  of  the  monastic  life  also  opened  to  the  Church 
exhaustless  sources  of  riches.    As  a  result,  the  Church 
became  the  richest  proprietor  in  all  Catholic  States.. 
This  was  especially  so  in  France.    But  the  more  these 
possessions  increased  the  more  they  were  bound  up  and 
inwoven  in  the  civil  government  by  an  embarrassing 
net-work  of  special  laws.    We  are  less  astonished  at  the 
acts  of  the  French  Assembly  when  we  see  to  what  an 
extent  the  Church  possessions  had  for  centuries  been 
under  the  control  of  the  chief  of  the  State. 

In  former  ages  the  King  was  the  virtual  Destower  of 
many  of  the  richly  paid  Church  offices.  To  the  most 
important  of  the  benefices  lie  made  the  appointments, 
since  his  nominations  to  the  Pope  were  equivalent  to 
elections.    But  it  was  especially  in  the  administration 


68  Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

of  the  Church  property  that  the  hand  of  the  State  was 
felt.  "  The  Church,"  says  Fleury,  "  has  neither  the 
same  liberty  to  purchase  nor  to  sell  real  estate  as  is  en- 
joyed by  individuals."  In  the  seventeenth  century,  it 
required  a  special  authorization  by  the  King  to  legalize 
either  the  alienation  or  the  acquisition  of  real  estate  by 
the  Church.  We  will  see  that  the  action  of  the  Con- 
stituent Assembly  in  laying  hand  on  this  vast  property 
was  perfectly  in  harmony  with  precedents  given  in  the 
reign  of  Louis  XIV. 

One  month  had  elapsed  since  the  famous  night  of  the 
fourth  of  August.  The  decrees  of  the  Assembly  had 
excited,  rather  than  satisfied,  the  passions  of  the  people. 
The  war  against  the  castles  had  broken  out  on  all  sides. 
Insufficient  harvests  added  to  the  public  distress.  The 
fearful  debt  increased  from  day  to  day.  The  financier 
Keeker  *  was  at  his  wits'  end.  His  cry  of  alarm,  taken 
up  and  resounded  by  the  eloquent  mouth  of  Mirabeau, 
revealed  an  appalling  danger  which  admitted  neither 
delay  nor  half  measures.  In  the  interval  between  two 
of  Mirabeauls  finest  orations  an  unknown  orator  arose 
and  proposed  to  demand  of  the  clergy  the  sacrifice  of 
the  precious  ornaments  of  the  Church.  This  he  declared 
would  amount  to  140,000,000  francs.  Contrary  to  all 
expectation,  the  Archbishop  of  Paris  arose  and  declared 
that  the  clergy  was  ready  to  sacrifice  all  except  so  much 
as  was  necessary  for  the  dignity  of  the  worship.  The 
clergy  wished  at  any  price  to  avoid  the  debate  on  the 
title  of  the  real  estate  of  the  Church.  The  cry  of  dis- 
tress of  a  whole  people,  however,  overcame  the  hesita- 
*  See  Appendix,  note  8. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  69 

tion  of  the  Assembly,  and  the  dreaded  question  was 
broached.  Unfortunately,  views  of  expediency  and  im- 
mediate utility  prevailed  too  much  to  the  detriment  of 
justice  and  safe  policy. 

In  an  address  drawn  up  in  the  name  of  the  Assembly 
by  Mirabeau,  soliciting  patriotic  donations,  it  was 
argued  at  length  that  the  wealth  of  the  Church,  in 
being  turned  to  the  defense  and  safety  of  the  country, 
would  not  be  perverted  from  its  orginal  destination, 
namely,  that  of  benefiting  the  people.  It  was  but  a 
provision  laid  up  for  such  a  time  of  need  as  the  present. 
It  was,  therefore,  only  an  act  of  piety  for  -the  clergy  to 
come  to  the  public  relief.  On  the  eleventh  of  October, 
1789,  the  formal  proposition  to  take  possession  of  the 
property  of  the  Church  was  for  the  first  time  submitted 
to  the  Constituent  Assembly;  and  by  a  curious  freak 
of  destiny,  the  motion  was  made  by  one  of  her  own  sons, 
a  youthful  Bishop,  who  represented  in  his  own  person 
the  two  privileged  orders  of  the  nation.  It  was  from 
the  di>dainful  mouth  of  Talleyrand  that  the  bold  words 
fell,  to  the  great  scandal  of  his  caste,  but  to  the  applause 
of  all  the  representatives  of  young  France.  Talleyrand 
was  the  mouth-piece  of  the  Committee  of  Twelve,  which 
had  been  appointed  to  discuss  the  securities  for  a  loan 
of  80,000,000  francs.  He  declared  that  the  other  re- 
sources of  the  nation  were  insulficient ;  that  it  was 
necessary  to  appropriate  the  property  of  the  Church  ; 
that  the  State  had  the  same  right  over  the  clergy  as 
over  other  corporations ;  that  it  might  revoke  their 
privileges  if  need  be;  and  that  if  the  State  provided  for 
the  maintenance  of  the  clergy  in  a  direct  manner,  the 


70         Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

design  of  the  donors  of  the  Church  property  would  not 
be  interfered  with,  nor  the  dictates  of  justice  violated. 
Two  days  afterward  Mirabeau,  unwilling  to  see  himself 
outdone  in  radical  measures,  proposed  the  decreeing  of 
the  following  principles :  "  First,  that  the  ownership  of 
the  property  of  the  clergy  belongs  to  the  nation  on  con- 
dition that  it  provides  for  the  support  of  the  clerical 
order ;  and,  second,  that  the  disposition  of  this  property 
be  such  that  no  curate  shall  receive  annually  less  than 
1,200  francs,  with  lodging."  It  was  well  that  the  ques- 
tion was  thus  presented  in  all  its  completeness.  The 
debate  lasted  three  weeks.  It  had  previously,  however, 
been  thoroughly  discussed  by  the  press.  The  able 
pens  of  Turgot,  Sieves,  and  Servan  had  shared  in  the 
work. 

The  discussion  in  the  Assembly  began,  as  usual,  with 
philosophical  generalities,  and  this  was  perhaps  its  most 
dangerous  feature,  for  what  property  is  it  whose  original 
title  will  bear  the  test  of  metaphysical  examination? 
The  Abbot  Maury  replied  to  the  Assembly  with  perti- 
nence :  "  I  will  prove  to  you  that  with  these  principles 
you  will  bring  us  to  an  agrarian  law.  In  fact,  as  often 
as  you  go  back  to  the  origin  of  property  the  nation  will 
go  back  with  you.  The  people  will  place  themselves  at 
the  epoch  when  they  left  the  forests  of  Germany,  and 
demand  a  new  division  of  lands." 

Three  groups  of  opinions  were  presently  observable 
in  the  Assembly :  first,  the  party  which  opposed  all  con- 
cession and  real  reform ;  second,  the  extreme  radical 
party,  which  took  no  account  of  circumstances,  and  saw 
only  the  danger  and  wants  of  the  government;  and, 


Religion  and  tJve  Reign  of  Tensor. 


71 


third,  the  cautious  reformers.  These  groups  are  known 
as  the  parties  of  the  right,  the  left,  and  the  middle. 
The  right  was,  naturally,  formed  of  the  higher  clergy, 
together  with  the  nobility.  They  committed  too  often 
the  fault  of  confounding  the  "cause  of  the  Church  prop- 
erty with  that  of  religion  itself.  "  The  sale  of  our  prop- 
erty will  remedy  nothing,"  said  the  Bishop  of  Clermont. 
"  Soon  there  would  remain  neither  ministers  nor  relig- 
ion." The  Archbishop  of  Aix  was  of  the  same  opinion, 
but  he  admitted  the  necessity  of  important  reforms,  pro- 
vided they  could  be  made  canonically.  One  is  at  first 
astonished  to  find  on  the  extreme  left,  in  opposition  to 
the  high  clergy,  quite  a  number  of  curates.  But  the 
lower  clergy  had  suffered  enough  in  the  past  at  the 
hands  of  the  high  dignitaries  to  dampen  their  zeal  in 
defense  of  privileges  from  the  enjoyment  of  which  they 
had  been  carefully  excluded.  The  Abbot  Gouttes  said 
in  plain  terms  that  the  riches  of  the  clergy  had  done 
much  evil  to  the  cause  of  religion  "  by  extending  the 
contempt,  due  only  to  certain  Church  dignitaries,  to  all 
the  Pastors  without  distinction."  The  Deputies  of  the 
left  maintained  that  the  clergy  were  not  the  possessors 
of  the  Church  property,  but  only  its  administrators. 
The  honest  and  eloquent  Barnave*  declared  from  the 
start  that  the  clerical  order  existed  only  for  the  State ; 
that  the  State  could  dissolve  it  at  its  will,  and  seize  and 
administer  the  property  at  its  pleasure.  The  discussion 
made  a  rapid  advance  when  the  jurisconsult  Thouret 
entered  the  arena.  He  raised  the  gravest  objection  to 
the  title  of  the  Church  to  its  property,  in  maintaining 
*  See  Appendix,  note  9. 


72  Religion  and  tJie  Reign  of  Terror. 

that  it  differed  entirely  from  the  title  of  individuals. 
"  Individuals,  existing  before  civil  law,  have  rights 
which  they  hold  from  nature  ;  such  is  the  right  of  prop- 
erty. All  corporate  bodies,  however,  exist  by  civil  law, 
and  their  rights  depend  on  law,  and  may  be  modified 
by  law.  The  legislative  power  has  consequently  com- 
plete power  over  them."  The  inferences  from  these 
principles  were  soon  drawn  by  the  whole  Assembly. 
A  Deputy  declared  that  the  State  was  not  only  the  com- 
petent master  of  religion,  but  that  it  even  might  abolish 
the  Christian  religion,  together  with  its  worship,  and 
establish  another  more  moral  one  in  its  place,  provided 
such  a  one  could  be  found.  "  It  is  fitting,"  said  he  in 
finishing,  "that  the  priests  be  salaried  by  the  nation; 
if  they  are  proprietors  they  may  be  too  independent." 
In  these  opinions  we  find  a  strange  mingling  of  truth 
with  error,  the  whole  showing  how  much  the  evil  genius 
of  the  Contrat  Social  prevailed  in  the  Legislature. 
Petion  *  produced  a  breeze  in  the  Assembly  by  boldly 
exposing  the  moral  disadvantages  of  the  riches  of  the 
clergy.  "  Is  it  not,"  asked  he,  "  the  immense  wealth  of 
the  priests  which  has  corrupted  their  morals  ?  "  Cries 
of  "  order  "  were  heard  ;  but  Camus,  the  Jansenist,  who 
was  presiding,  declared  that  he  could  not  call  a  speaker  to 
order  for  uttering  what  was  printed  all  over  the  nation. 

Between  these  two  extreme  parties  a  third  opinion, 
wiser  and  more  moderate,  was  held  and  defended  The 
statesman  Malouet,  and  the  Abbots  Gregory  and  Gout- 
tes,  were  the  chief  speakers.  Malouet  expressed  great 
fear  of  the  evil  effects  of  alienating  the  affections  of  the 
*  See  Appendix,  note  10. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  73 

clergy  from  the  popular  cause,  at  a  time  when  the  As- 
sembly so  much  needed  their  aid  to  make  the  passage 
easy  from  the  old  to  the  new  state  of  things.  He 
argued  that  it  was  precisely  because  of  the  popular 
fury  against  the  property  of  the  Church  that  the  legis- 
lative Assembly  should  be  more  cautious  in  its  action. 
He  proposed  to  leave  to  the  Church  as  much  as  was 
strictly  necessary  to  support  the  expenses  of  the  clergy, 
and  to  appropriate  all  the  rest  to  the  uses  of  the  State.' 
This  proposition  was  surely  a  wise  and  just  mean  be- 
tween the  radical  extremes,  but  it  found  little  favor 
amid  the  passions  of  the  hour.    It  must  be  confessed 
that  the  priests  did  many  things  to  irritate  and  excite 
their  opponents.    They  circulated,  for  ^example,  a  pre- 
tended petition  of  the  poor  of  various  parishes,  against 
any  sale  of  Church  property  on  the  plea  that  thus"  they 
would  be  shut  off  from  the  abundant  alms  which  from 
time  immemorial  they  had  received  from  the  hands  of 
the  Church.    To  bring  the  discussion  finally  to  a  ter- 
mination it  was  necessary  that  Achilles  should  come  out 
of  his  tent.    It  was  for  Mirabeau  to  close  the  debate, 
and  carry  the  majority  with  him.    It  is  to  be  regretted 
that  his  weight  was  thrown  into  the  ultra-radicar  scale. 
Had  his  voice  been  for  conciliation  he  might  have  saved 
his  country  from  many  misfortunes ;  but  he  was  the 
chief  of  a  party,  and,  therefore,  very  dependent.  He 
pleaded  with  great  eloquence  and  dialectical  skill  for 
the  popular  cause ;  but  he  was  not  careful  enough  in 
guarding  the  rights  of  conscience,  and  could  not  get  rid 
of  the  notion,  that  it  was  necessary  to  have  an  official 
religion  under  the  surveillance  of  the  State.    His  mo- 

10 


74  Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

tion  was  carried  on  the  fifth  of  November,  under  the 
following  form :  "  All  the  property  of  the  clergy  is  at 
the  disposal  of  the  nation  on  condition  that  it  shall  pro- 
vide in  a  fitting  manner  for  the  expenses  of  worship,  the 
maintenance  of  its  ministers,  and  the  necessities  of  the 
poor.  As  to  the  dispositions  to  be  made  for  the  minis- 
ters of  religion,  they  shall  be  paid  each  not  less  than* 
one  thousand  two  hundred  francs,  not  including  lodging 
and  the  use  of  a  garden." 

Before  pronouncing  judgment  on  the  justice  of  this 
revolutionary  decree,  let  us  remind  the  detractors  of  the 
French  Revolution  that  in  this  measure  it  did  nothing 
which  is  not  justified  by  the  principles  of  the  ancient 
monarchy.  We  have  the  proof  in  a  remarkable  work 
which  was  compiled  by  the  Master  of  Requests,  at  the 
express  order  of  Louis  XIV.,  for  the  purpose  of  ascer- 
taining the  rights  of  the  crown  in  ecclesiastical  matters. 
The  conclusion  reached  by  this  author  is,  that  except  in 
cases  of  pressing  necessity  the  goods  of  the  Church  can- 
not be  alienated  without  the  concurrence  of  the 'Church 
itself.  But  these  restrictions  fall  entirely  away  in  cases 
of  urgent  necessity.  "  For  example,"  says  he,  "  when 
an  invasion  of  an  enemy  is  to  be  repulsed,  it  cannot  be 
denied  that  the  King  has  the  right  to  use  the  property 
of  the  Church  as  well  as  other  property  for  the  defense 
of  the  State."  It  is  well  known  that,  acting  on  these 
principles,  Michault  proposed  an  alienation  of  a  portion 
of  the  property  of  the  Church  in  the  year  1749.  The 
Constituent  Assembly,  in  its  boldest  decrees,  did  nothing 
more  than  act  on  the  same  principle;  it  simply  laid 
hand  on  the  property  of  the  Church  in  a  case  of  most 


Rdigion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 


75 


urgent  national  necessity.  Talleyrand  and  Mirabeau 
acted  on  the  principles  of  Louis  XIV. 

We  cannot  deny  the  special  right  of  the  State  to  con- 
trol the  Church  so  far  as  it  is  a  corporate  body.    If  the 
State  gave  to  corporations  the  same  iuimunities  as  to 
individuals,  they  would  soon  become  master  of  the 
State  itself,  from  the  fact  that  their  property,  not  being 
liable  to  the  vicissitudes  of  inheritance,  would  accumu- 
late very  rapidly,  and  to  an  unlimited  extent.  They 
would  absorb  the  chief  part  of  the  wealth  of  the  State. 
For  this  reason  religious  corporations  have  always  been 
placed,  in  France,  under  the  strict  surveillance  of  the 
laws.    They  have  existed  only  by  special  royal  per- 
mits.    Xow  it  cannot  be  denied  that  the  State  has  the 
right,  if  it  sees  fit,  to  withdraw  its  authorization,  and 
dissolve  these  same  corporate  bodies.    Of  course,  how- 
ever, it  has  not  the  right  to  suspend  an  essential  lib- 
erty; the  general  good  does  not  permit  it  to  interfere 
with  the  rights  of  the  conscience,  or  to  forbid  the  indi- 
vidual or  collective  manifestation  of  the  religious  belief 
of  its  citizens.   Thus  religion  in  none  of  its  forms  should 
depend  on  the  pleasure  of  the  State.    The  State  should 
neither  authorize  nor  interdict  it,  for  in  so  doing  it  in- 
terferes with  an  original  right  of  the  conscience°  The 
priests,  who  were  indignant  at  the  alienation  of  the 
goods  of  the  Church,  ought  much  more  to  have  mani- 
fested their  holy  horror  at  the  alienation  of  the  rights 
of  conscience,  by  a  State  Church,  nnder  the  ancient 
monarchy.    This  was  a  much  greater  profanation  than 
that  committed  by  the  Constituent  Assembly.  Relig- 
ion, however  inviolable  in  itself,  is  so  no  longer  when  it 


76         Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

becomes  a  vast  political  corporation,  and  the  proprietor 
of  a  large  portion  of  the  soil  of  a  nation.  In  this  re- 
spect it  falls  under  the  power  of  the  State,  and  grows 
in  dependence  as  its  possessions  increase.  The  political 
element  in  its  constitution  subjects  it  to  the  fluctuating 
influence  of  political  systems.  When  every  thing  about 
it  is  undergoing  reform  it  surely  cannot  remain  un- 
touched, unless  it  be  true  that  one  age  can  establish 
institutions  which  no  future  generation  can  change,  and, 
as  M.  Laboulaye  well  observes,  unless  it  be  a  fact  that 
the  earth  no  longer  belongs  to  the  living,  but  to  the 
dead.  It  is  not  less  evident  that  one  generation  should 
not  have  to  bear  all  the  expenses  of  reforms  which  it 
could  not  avoid,  and  which  centuries  of  abuse  have 
rendered  necessary.  If,  therefore,  in  the  present  case 
the  State  had  a  right  to  alienate  the  goods  of  the 
Church,  it  remains  to  be  seen  whether  it  used  its  right 
wisely,  and,  above  all,  whether  it  chose  the  best  mean* 
of  providing  for  public  worship. 

It  was  to  the  interest  of  the  Revolution,  while  inter- 
vening in  the  affairs  of  the  Church,  to  avoid  as  much  as 
possible  the  alienation  of  the  affections  of  so  powerful  a 
class  as  the  ministers  of  the  altar.  Those  who  thought 
that  at  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  Christian 
Church  was  incapable  of  deeply  agitating  and  endan- 
gering the  peace  of  the  country,  were  sadly  mistaken. 
They  judged  the  whole  of  the  nation  by  the  frivolous 
drawing-rooms  of  Paris.  Despite  the  scandals  of  the 
high  clergy,  and  the  incredulity  of  the  educated  classes, 
the  religious  sentiment  was  still  the  most  powerful  ele- 
ment with  which  the  Revolution  had  to  contend.  And 


E  dig  ion  and  the  Etign  of  Terror.  77 


now  that  the  people  had  fallen  into  trials  and  sufferings, 
it  was  sensibly  regaining  its  natural  strength.  The 
radieal  measures  of  the  Assembly  were  well  litted  to 
strengthen  both  the  real  religion  and  the  fanaticism  of 
the  people  and  clergy,  for  now  they  could  plausibly 
believe  themselves  the  objects  of  injustice  and  persecu- 
tion. Religion  is  always  instinctively  sought  by  thei 
sutfering  and  wronged.  It  was  not  in  the  power  of  the 
Assembly  to  give  the  people  a  new  religion  in  place  of 
the  old  one.  It  was,  therefore,  a  great  political  blunder 
to  take  at  once  such  a  radical  step  against  the  time- 
honored  immunities  of  the  clergy.  The  needed  prop- 
erty could  have  been  obtained  in  a  much  more  concili- 
atory way.  It  is  assuredly  to  the  interest  both  of 
Church  and  State  that  they  be  independent  of  each 
other.  Xow  had  some  such  proposition  as  that  of  Ma- 
loud  been  adopted,  the  most  of  the  property  might  have 
been  obtained  for  the  relief  of  the  country,  and  the  rest 
set  apart  for  the  support  of  the  ministers  of  the  Church, 
leaving  the  management  of  it  to  the  clercjv,  and  thus 
freeing  the  State  from  its  troublesome  and  dangerous 
connection  with  the  Church.  A  willingness  to*  such  a 
step  had  finally  been  expressed,  even  by  the  high  clergy. 
Tims  the  question  of  Church  and  State  would  have  been 
wisely  and  at  once  settled,  and  religion  in  France  would 
have  been  in  the  happy  condition  it  has  so  long  enjoyed 
in  the  United  States.  This  is  the  solution  for  which 
Cavour,  the  great  statesman  of  modern  Italy,  strove  so 
earnestly — namely,  a  free  Church  in  a  free  State. 

It  was  not  so  much  to  establish*  a  principle  as  to  raise 
funds  that  the  Assembly  had  \  oted  the  alienation  of  the 


78         Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

goods  of  the  Church.  The  work,  therefore,  of  putting 
the  decree  into  practical  effect  soon  began.  The  Com 
mittee  which  had  been  formed  on  the  twentieth  of  Au 
gust,  1789,  to  prepare  the  part  of  the  constitution  which 
had  relation  to  the  Church,  was  now  furnished  with  an 
immense  increase  of  business.  It  had  to  prepare  plans 
for  the  sale  and  management  of  the  Church  property, 
and  for  the  support  and  reorganization  of  the  Church. 
Composed  at  first  of  fifteen  members,  it  was  after- 
ward increased.  It  embraced  men  of  every  shade  o*f 
opinion.  This  Committee  was  subdivided  into  three 
sections,  the  one  being  charged  with  the  reconstruction 
of  the  Church  constitution,  and  the  other  two  with  the 
administration  of  the  confiscated  property.  These  sec- 
tions went  to  work  with  great  zeal,  and  it  is  in  accord- 
ance with  their  recommendations  that  those  measures 
of  the  Assembly  were  decreed  which  threw  the  Church 
into  distress  and  anarchy. 

In  November  the  Assembly  ordered  the  Church  prop- 
erty to  be  put  under  the  charge  of  the  King  and  of  the 
courts,  and  advised  the  King  to  make  for  the  present  no 
more  appointments  to  benefices.  On  the  motion  of  an 
Abbot  a  decree  was  issued  requiring  all  who  possessed 
benefices  to  present,  before  the  courts,  a  detailed  list  of 
all  the  chattels  and  real  estate  of  the  Church  in  their 
possession.  This  declaration,  after  having  been  posted 
in  the  parish  churches,  was  to  be  returned  to  the  As- 
sembly. These  motions  indicated  the  firm  intention  of 
the  nation  to  make  use  of  the  new  resources  which  had 
fallen  into  its  hands. 

After  a  hot  debate,  in  which  some  of  the  high  clergy 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  79 

distinguished  themselves  in  vain,  the  Assembly  decreed, 
on  the  20th  of  December,  the  immediate  sale  of  Church 
property  to  the  amount  of  four  hundred  million  francs, 
to  serve  as  a  basis  for  the  issue  of  paper  money.  It 
was  observed  facetiously  by  some  of  the  Deputies,  that 
this  disembarrassing  the  clergy  of  temporal  cares  would 
facilitate  the  return  of  the  Church  to  her  golden  age. 
The  Assembly  now  took  possession  also  of  the  royal 
domain.  Truly  may  we  say,  a  great  gulf  had  been  cre- 
ated between  ancient  and  modern  France. 

One  of  the  first  cares  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Committee 
was  to  recommend  to  the  Assembly  the  abolition  of  the 
monastic  orders,  which  at  this  time  covered  the  entire 
country.    It  was  a  complex  question.    The  laws  had 
covered  the  religious  vows  with  their  powerful  sanction. 
But  public  opinion  urged  to  the  reform.    The  monastic 
•life,  once  useful  in  converting  and  enlightening  the 
people,  had  fallen  into  a  decline  which  its  most  eloquent 
apologist,  Montalembert,  has  had  the  frankness  to  admit 
and  bewail.    Living  in  idleness,  the  monks  had  too  often 
led  lives  of  vice  and  shame.    Those  employed  in  educa- 
tion shared  more  indulgence  than  the  others.    Still,  it  is 
quite  certain  that  they  taught  Latin  better  than  religion. 
Voltaire  and  the  infidels  of  his  age  had  been  tattght'in 
their  colleges.    Doubtless  there  remained  yet  in  the 
cloisters  some  genuine  piety;  still,  the  opposition  to  the 
convents  increased  from  day  to  day.    Voltaire  had  at- 
tacked them  with  power.    Diderot  had  satirized  and 
turned  them  into  ridicule.    His  influence  was  manifest 
in  more  than  one  discourse  in  the  National  Assembly. 
The  abolition  of  the  order  of  Jesuits  in  France,  and  the 


80         Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror, 


numerous  suppressions  of  monasteries  in  Austria  by- 
Joseph  II.,  had  prepared  the  way  for  a  more  radical 
reform  in  France. 

The  debates  on  this  branch  of  reform  were  opened  in 
the  Assembly  on  the  22d  of  February,  1790.  Camus, 
Gregory,  and  all  the  Jansenists,  pleaded  the  cause  of  the 
orders.  The  high  clergy  protested  that  the  monks  were 
the  most  useful  auxiliaries  of  the  Church.  The  Bishop 
of  Nancy  attempted  to  turn  attention  from  the  main 
question  by  moving  that  the  Assembly  declare  the  CatH- 
olic  religion  to  be  the  national  religion,  but  he  only  suc- 
ceeded in  calling  upon  his  head  a  shower  of  wrath  from 
Charles  Lameth.*  Petion  and  others  spoke  of  the  con- 
vents almost  in  the  strain  of  Diderot.  It  was  finally 
decreed  that  the  law  should  no  longer  recognize  the 
monastic  vows,  and  that  the  monks  should  thenceforth 
be  free  to  abandon  or  to  remain  in  the  convents,  as 
should  seem  to  them  best.  On  motion  of  Thouret  the 
religious  orders  were  suppressed,  and  new  ones  forbidden 
to  be  introduced  into  France.  This  was  a  violent  in 
fringement  of  the  rights  of  conscience ;  it  was  forbidding 
the  free  exercise  of  certain  forms  of  religious  association. 

The  convents  of  women  had  not  yet  been  touched. 
It  now  remained  to  fix  the  pensions  of  such  monks 
as  should  break  their  vows  and  leave  the  cloisters.  It 
was  for  some  time  debated  as  to  whether  all  should  be 
paid  the  same  sum,  or  whether  account  should  be  taken 
of  their  previous  incomes ;  whether  the  rich  Benedictine 
should  receive  only  as  much  as  the  mendicant  Capuchin. 
Before  the  matter  was  settled,  Robespierre  f  had  shown 
*  See  Appendix,  uote  11.  \  Ibid.,  note  12. 


Religion  and  the  licign  of  Terror.  81 

how  much  justice  was  to  be  expected  from  the  demagogue 
party  by  declaring  that,  in  his  opinion,  if  any  distinction 
was  to  be  made,,  it  should  be  in  favor  of  the  begging 
orders — that  is,  inversely  to  their  previous  receipts.  The 
pension  was  finally  fixed  at  eight  hundred  francs  for  the 
mendicant  monks,  and  nine  hundred  for  the  non-mendi- 
cants. It  is  a  remarkable  fact,  that  on  motion  of  Gregory, 
the  Jansenist,  and  Barnave,  the  Protestant,  the  Jesuits 
were  included  in  this  arrangement.  The  same  principle 
was  subsequently  applied  to  the  monks  who  should  re- 
main in  the  cloisters  not  confiscated. 

There  remained  yet  to  be  discussed  in  the  Assembly 
a  question  which  was  destined  to  excite  the  most  violent 
storm,  namely,  to  determine  into  whose  hands  should 
be  placed  the  administration  of  the  alienated  Church 
property.  The  memorable  debate  opened  on  the  9th  of 
April,  IV 90.  Chasset  read  a  report  from  the  Ecclesias- 
tical Committee.  It  was  the  death-knell  of  the  ancient 
constitution  of  the  Gallican  Church.  It  recommended 
the  appropriation  of  the  whole  of  the  Church  property, 
on  the  plea  of  the  pressing  wants  of  the  nation,  and  on 
condition  of  the  payment  of  the  clergy  by  direct  tax. 
"  Worship,"  said  he,  "  is  a  duty  of  all.  All  are  supposed 
to  share  in  it,  for  the  temple  of  the  Lord  is  open  to  all. 
The  sacred  police,  just  like  the  army  of  defense,  is  main- 
tained for  the  benefit  of  all.  It  is  just  and  constitutional 
to  make  all  contribute  to  the  expense  of  worship  by 
means  of  a  tax  on  all."  Chasset  proposed  that  the 
Church  property  be  administrated  for  the  time  being  by 
the  provincial  Assemblies,  that  all  tithes  cease  to  be  paid 

from  the  first  of  January  of  the  next  year,  and  that  from 

11 


82         Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

the  same  date  the  clergy  be  salaried  by  the  State.  He 
stated  that  the  Committee  had  already  estimated  the  sum 
total  of  these  salaries  at  133,884,800  francs;  a  sum  which 
showed  that  the  Assembly  would  make  a  large  saving 

0   on  the  former  amounts  indirectly  paid  to  the  Church, 
and  at  the  same  time  suppress  many  crying  abuses. 

The  high  clergy  regarded  these  propositions  as  in  the 
highest  degree  inimical  to  their  order,  which  had  hith- 
erto lived  on  the  income  of  its  own  domains.  They 
therefore  attacked  them  with  as  much  passion  as  if  they 
had  involved  the  subversion  of  religion  itself.  Some  of 
them  indulged  in  such  extravagant  cries  of  holy  horror, 
and  in  such  invocations  to  God,  as  to  make  the  impression 
that  they  thought  more  of  their  rich  incomes  than  of  the 

.  essence  of  religion  itself.  An  obscure  Deputy  had  scarcely 
begun  to  point  out  the  happy  effects  of  freeing  the  clergy 
from  their  temporal  cares,  when  his  voice  was  drowned 
by  the  murmurs  of  the  Conservatives.  Abbot  Gregory 
argued,  in  a  very  sensible  discourse,  in  favor  of  leaving 
to  the  Church  enough  to  support  itself,  but  such  mod- 
erate opinions  had  no  chance  of  success.  The  contest 
was  between  the  right  wing,  which  wished  to  preserve 
the  Church  as  a  rich  corporation,  and  the  radical  left, 
which  desired  to  reduce  it  to  a  mere  department  of  the 
government.  The  latter  spoke  with  the  cold  defiance  of 
those  who  are  assured,  in  advance,  of  the  victory. 
"  When  religion,"  said  Thouret,  "  sent  forth  into  society 
her  ministers,  she  did  not  say  to  them,  Go,  prosper  and 
get  rich.  No  !  she  said  to  them,  Preach  my  word  and  my 
principles.  As  to  their  temporal  subsistence,  she  simply 
said,  It  is  right  that  the  priests  shall  live  of  the  altar. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  83 

Now  we,  the  legislators  of  France,  have  said,  in  strict 
conformity  to  these  words,  The  public  functionary  shall 
live  of  his  functions.'7  This  expresses  exactly-  the  es- 
sence of  the  new  State  Church  scheme.  It  is  its  grate st 
condemnation  that  it  reduces  the  clergy  to  the  condition 
of  mere  hirelings.  We  see  here,  in  germ,  the  whole  civil 
constitution  of  the  clergy,  which  was  afterward  to  do  so 
much  harm. 

As  the  discussion  advanced,  the  opposition  and  ex- 
citement of  the  Church  party  grew  more  intense."  They 
trembled  with  indignation,  rather  than  argued.  Appeals 
to  the  God  of  their  fathers  were  heard  on  every  hand. 
The  Archbishop  of  Aix  terminated  his  harangue  by 
quoting  to  the  Assembly  the  words  of  an  ancient  bishop, 
"  You  may  rob  us  of  our  goods,  but  we  will  not  give 
them  to  you."  At  this  point  in  the  debate  an  incident  oc- 
curred which  threw  all  Paris  into  the  wildest  excitement. 
Dom  Gerle,  a  Carthusian  monk,  perfectly  sincere  in  his 
religion  as  well  as  in  his  attachment  to  the  Revolution, 
undertook  to  conciliate  the  parties  by  moving  that  the 
Assembly  quiet  the  fears  of  the  Church  by  decreeing 
that  the  Catholic  religion  was,  and  should  always  remain, 
the  sole  authorized  and  national  worship  of  the  French. 
The  gravity  of  such  a  decree  could  not  escape  the  at- 
tention of  the  Assembly,  for  it  involved  an  absolute  de- 
nial of  the  rights  of  conscience.  The  motion  was  hailed 
by  the  party  of  the  right  with  the  warmest  enthusiasm. 
Abbot  Maury  was  heard,  on  retiring  from  the  hall,  to  ex- 
claim, in  confidence  of  the  success  of  the  motion,  "  \V, 
have  them  ! "  It  was  attempted  to  carry  it  without  dis- 
rnwrion,  and.       it  were,  by  surprise.    The  Bishop  of 


84         Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

Clermont,  forgetting  that  he  was  not  in  his  pulpit,  de- 
clared that  a  Christian  ought  to  be  ready  to  confess  his 
faith  as  soon  as  called  on,  and  that  a  Catholic  assembly- 
ought  not  to  wait  to  discuss  that  which  should  spring 
from  spontaneous  feeling.  One  of  the  members  invoked 
to  aid,  on  this  important  occasion,  the  venerable  names 
of  Clovis,  Charlemagne,  and  St.  Louis.  Charles  Lameth 
rose  and  sarcastically  asked  where  was  the  necessity  of 
demanding  a  profession  of  faith  of  an  Assembly  "  which 
had  realized  the  first  principle  of  the  Gospel  by  humil- 
iating the  proud  and  taking  under  its  protection  the 
lowly  and  the  feeble.  Has  it  not  verified  the  words  of 
Christ,  that  the  first  should  be  last  ?  "  This  taunt  was 
in  no  way  calculated  to  calm  the  partisans  of  Dom  Gerle's 
motion.  They  insisted  on  the  putting  of  the  motion, 
and  so  much  the  more  as  they  saw  Mirabeau  about  to 
arise  to  speak.  The  majority  had  the  greatest  difficulty 
in  adjourning  the  question  till  the  next  day.  The  mem- 
bers of  the  right  would  not  leave  their  seats,  and  it  was 
long  after  the  adjournment  before  they  left  the  hall. 
When  they  did  go,  it  was  to  concoct  a  theatrical  stroke 
for  the  coming  session. 

The  news  of  the  affair  ran  like  wildfire  throughout  the 
city  of  Paris.  The  magic  pen  of  Camille  Desmoulins* 
denounced  the  scheme  of  the  clergy  in  language  which 
caused,  at  the  same  time,  laughter  and  terror.  His 
journal,  scattered  widely  through  the  city  by  the  "three 
hundred  patriotic  trumpets  of  the  newsboys,"  informed 
the  people  of  Paris  that  the  Deputies  of  the  right  were 
assembled  in  the  church  of  the  Capuchins,  to  concert  a 
*  See  Appendix,  note  13. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Tewor.  85 

plaD  for  obtaining  a  decree,  in  to-morrow's  Assembly, 
which  would  establish  anew  the  alliance  of  the  Throne 
and  the  Altar.  And  in  fact  such  a  meeting  did  take 
place.  It  was  decided  that  if  the  motion  of  Dora  Gerie 
was  rejected,  the  party  of  the  right  would  in  a  body 
leave  the  Assembly  hall,  and,  traversing  the  Tuileries, 
place  in  the  hands  of  the  King  a  solemn  protest  against 
the  wicked  refusal.  To  give  greater  eclat  to  their  pro- 
testation they  agreed  to  repair  to  the  coming  session 
habited  in  black,  and  with  swords  at  their  sides.  But 
the  Court  feared  the  effect  of  such  a  step,  and  informed 
them  that  the  King  would  not  receive  them.  At  the 
same  hour  the  excitement  was  not  less  at  the  head- 
quarters of  the  party  of  the  left,  namely,  at -the  Jacobin 
Club,  at  the  Palais-Royal,  and  at  the  coffee-houses. 

Bailly  and  Lafayette,  fearing  a  bloody  collision, 
doubled  the  police,  and  stationed  large  bodies  of  troops 
around  the  hall  of  the  Assembly.  But  the  crowd  occu- 
pied every  spot  that  was  left  vacant.  The  deputies  of 
the  right,  on  approaching  the  hall,  were  saluted  with 
jeers  and  hisses.  The  populace  were  indignant  in  the 
extreme.  It  is  impossible  to  reproduce  the  varied  fea- 
tures of  this  stormy  debate,  the  sharp  cross-firing,  the 
countless  interruptions,  and  the  endless  calls  to  order. 
Sometimes  large  fractions  of  the  Assembly  sprang  to 
their  feet  as  one  man,  and  vociferated  the  same  cry. 
Amid  all  the  confusion,  however,  it  was  plain  that  only 
two  leading  opinions  were  uttered,  namely,  that  of  the 
adherents  of  a  national  Church,  and  that  of  the  friends 
of  religious  liberty.  A  few  noble  words  fell  from  the 
lips  of  Baron  Menou.    He  said  that  however  much  lie 


86         Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

loved  the  Catholic  religion  for  his  own  part,  yet  it 
would  not  follow  from  that  that  he  should  wish  to  im- 
pose it  on  all  his  fellow-citizens.  "  My  opinion,"  said 
he,  "is  my  own.  Why  should  I  wish  to  make  my  re- 
ligion the  dominant  one  ?  Open  your  annals  and  see 
what  evils  have  come  of  religious  wars.  Shall  the  Na- 
tional Assembly  become  the  instrument  of  the  misfor- 
tunes of  the  people  ?  Ministers  of  religion,  return  to 
your  functions.  Proclaim  a  system,  to  the  glory  of 
which  human  laws  can  add  nothing.  Do  not  put  car- 
nal weapons  into  the  hands  of  God." 

Amid  the  increasing  storm  an  attempt  was  made  to 
calm  the  spirits.  It  was  moved  to  declare  "that  the 
majesty  of  religion  and  the  honor  due  to  it  are  such  as 
to  forbid  making  it  the  object  of  a  legislative  debate ;" 
but  the  right  regarded  this  as  adding  hypocrisy  to 
insult.  When  a  member,  in  the  interest  of  the  Church 
party,  called  to  mind  the  oath  made  by  Louis  XIV.  in 
1675,  to  maintain  the  Catholic  religion  to  the  exclusion 
of  every  other,  the  great  Mirabeau  could  not  restrain  his 
indignation.  "  I  am  not  surprised,"  said  he,  "  that  refer- 
ences are  made  to  a  reign  in  which  the  Edict  of  Nantes 
was  revoked.  Doubtless  it  affords  examples  of  all  sorts 
of  intolerance ;  but  consider.  From  this  tribune  from 
which  I  address  you  I  see  that  fatal  window  where  a 
King,  the  murderer  of  his  people,  mingling  worldly 
with  religious  matters,  fired  the  signal  gun  for  the  mas- 
sacre of  St.  Bartholomew.  I  will  say  no  more;  there  is 
no  ground  for  hesitation."  After  further  discussion  the 
motion  of  Dom  Gerle  was  withdrawn,  and  the  Assembly 
declared  by  a  vote  that,  having  no  authority  over  the 


Sdifion  and  the  Etign  of  Tewor.  87 

conscience,  or  over  religious  opinions,  and  having  given 
sufficient  proof  of  its  attachment  to  the  Catholic  Church 
in  agreeing  to  salary  its  ministers  out  of  the  public 
treasury,  it  would  now  proceed  to  the  legitimate  busi- 
ness of  the  day. 

In  the  evening  the  popular  excitement  was  again 
intense.  The  democratic  press  teemed  with  contemptu- 
ous onslaughts  on  the  clergy.  Another  clerical  reunion 
took  place.  It  was  proposed  formally  to  denounce  to 
the  nation  the  un-Catholic  temper  of  the  Assembly.  A 
mob,  however,  surrounded  the  Church,  and  under  pre- 
text of  serving  the  cause  of  liberty,  violated  one  of  its 
sacred  rights  by  insulting  the  priests  as  they  retired. 
They  had  not  had  time  to  draw  up  a  formal  protest,  but 
they  went  forth,  each  determined  to  use  to  the  utmost 
his  personal  influence. 

The  debate  as  to  the  Church  property  continued. 
Several  priests  frankly  admitted  the  abuses  which  riches 
had  caused  to  religion.  An  Abbot  had  the  shameless- 
ness  to  say  in  reply  to  them,  that  a  religion  of  poverty, 
like  Christianity  at  the  start,  might  be  good  enough  for 
a  people  of  slaves  cowering  under  the  lashes  of  their 
master,  and  needing  the  consolations  of  heaven  as  an 
offset  against  the  sufferings  of  this  life,  but  that  none 
but  a  wealthy  religion  could  obtain  consideration  in  a 
flourishing  kingdom  like  France.  The  result  of  the 
whole  deliberation  was,  that  the  Assembly  adopted  the 
recommendations  of  Chasset,  and  sanctioned  the  prin- 
ciple of  salarying  the  priests. 

The  conclusion  thus  arrived  at  was  self-contradictory. 
The  Assembly  had  rightly  refused  to  proclaim  a  na- 


88  Religion  and  the  Reign  %>f  Terror. 

tional  religion,  and  yet  it  had  adopted  measures  for 
creating  a  civil,  a  state  religion.  In  treating  religion 
thus,  like  the  magistracy  or  the  police,  it  did  almost 
the  very  thing  it  wished  to  avoid  when  it  refused  to 
proclaim  a  national  Church.  But  the  principle  of  the 
distinction  of  the  spiritual  and  the  temporal  powers 
had  been  emphatically  consecrated.  Mirabeau  admira- 
bly stated  the  result  of  the  deliberations,  when  he  ex- 
claimed "  that  the  Assemblv  was  no  longer  theological, 
but  national."  TTe  shall  have  frequent  occasion  to  refer 
to  the  evils  resulting  from  an  imperfect  solution  of  these 
religious  troubles.  The  abolition  of  a  powerful  system, 
which  had  lived  by  privilege  and  oppression,  was  surely 
a  precious  conquest ;  but  the  infringement  of  the  princi- 
ple of  religious  freedom,  committed  by  the  Assembly 
when  it  entangled  the  Church  again  in  the-  meshes  of 
politics  by  salarying  its  ministers,  exerted  an  unfortunate 
influence  as  well  on  the  Church  as  on  the  cause  of  lib- 
erty in  general.  The  principle  of  religious  equality  for 
all  Churches  had,  however,  been  sanctioned,  if  not  in 
point  of  salary,  yet  in  point  of  fact. 

The  Assembly  could  not  have  adopted  the  motion  of 
Dom  Gerle  without  putting  itself  in  flat  contradiction 
with  itself  in  respect  to  the  action  it  had  taken  in  favor 
of  the  Protestants,  and  another  still  more  misused  class 
of  society,  the  Jews.  A  decree  had  been  adopted  in 
December,  1789,  declaring  the  Protestants  eligible  to 
all  civil  offices  without  exception.  Subsequently,  rights 
of  citizenship  were  decreed  to  all  the  descendants  of 
refugee  Protestants  who  would  return  to  France.  In 
March,  1790,  Rabaut  St.  Etienne,  the  worthy  son  of  the 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Tcwor.  89 

aged  Huguenot  preacher  of  the  desert,  on  whose  head  a 
price  had  so  often  been  set,  wrote  a  letter  to  the  latter 
which  contained  these  words  :  "  The  President  of  the 
National  Assembly  is  at  your  feet."  He  had  been 
elected  to  the  chair  of  that  great  body,  but  it  was 
some  time  still  before  all  barriers  against  the  Jews  were 
broken  down.  Why  should  we  wonder  at  this  ?  Had 
not  free  England  still  refused  them  a  real  part  in  politi- 
cal life  by  imposing  an  oath  at  the  doors  of  Parliament 
which  no  Jew  could  take  ?  Let  us  recognize  it,  to  the 
honor  of  Robespierre,  that  from  the  very  first  he  refused 
to  favor  any  law  of  exception  to  the  disadvantage  of 
this  despised  people.  In  December,  1789,  he  said:  "  The 
vices  of  the  Jews  spring  from  the  debased  condition 
into  which  you  Ijave  plunged  them.  I  think  we  should 
deprive  no  individual  of  this  class  of  the  sacred  rights 
which  belong  to  him  as  man.  His  cause  is  the  general 
cause.  We  ought  to  decree  the  principle."  Another 
Deputy  uttered  these  noble  words :  "  Let  us  leave  the 
conscience  free.  Either  do  not  make  it  a  civil  offense 
to  direct  the  thoughts  and  feelings  to  Heaven  in  this  or 
that. manner,  or  be  consistent — proclaim  a  national  re- 
ligion, arm  it  with  the  sword,  and  blot  out  youi-  decla- 
ration of  the  rights  of  man."  The  sharpest  opponents 
of  the  Jews  were  the  clergy.  Even  Mirabeau  was  car- 
ried over  into  the  opposition.  It  was  only  after  many 
delays,  after  receiving  and  rejecting  many  petitions 
from  Jews  in  all  parts  of  France,  that  in  September, 
1791,  the  Assembly  braved  the  current  of  prejudice, 
and  did  full  justice  to  this  class  of  society.  The  Come- 
dians did  not  have  to  wait  as  long  as  the  Jews  to  be 

12 


90         Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

recognized  as  citizens ;  but  Abbot  Maury  could  not 
avoid  the  temptation  to  make  a  display  of  opposition. 
He  forgot  that  the  most  contemptible  of  all  comedians 
is  he  who  hides  under  a  priestly  garb  the  whole  nest  of 
worldly  passions.  . 

Such  was  the  general  position  of  the  Constituent  As- 
sembly on  the  question  of  religious  liberty  and  the 
rights  of  conscience. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  91 


CHAPTER  in. 

THE  CIVIL  CONSTITUTION  OF  THE  CLERGY  THE  ASSEM- 
BLY TRANSFORMED  INTO  A  COUNCIL. 

The  day  the  Assembly  decreed  to  salary  the  priests  as 
officers  of  public  morality  it  assumed  the  obligation  of 
giving  to  the  Church  a  new  civil  constitution.  The 
first  fault  led  to  the  second.    It  was  a  deplorable  mis- 
take for  a  political  assembly  to  meddle  with  the  work 
of  a  Church  council.    The  civil  constitution  given  by 
the  Assembly  to  the  Catholic  Church  of  France  was 
the  joint  offspring  of  the  Jansenists  and  the  free  think- 
ers.   On  the  one  side  it  was  a  just  chastisement  of  a 
haughty  establishment,  which,  though  having  lost  the 
fervor  of  its  primitive  faith,  yet  persisted  in  all  its  for- 
mer bigotry  and  intolerance  ;  but  on  the  other,  it  was  a 
violent  infringement  on  religious  liberty,  and  occasioned 
as  well  as  justified  a  most  earnest  and  dangerous  oppo- 
sition.   The  Jansenists,  who  were  numerous  in  the  As- 
sembly, taking  advantage  of  the  occasion,  undertook,  in 
league  with  the  politicians,  to  frame  a  constitution  for 
the  Church  which  should  embody  all  of  their  favorite 
notions  as  to  the  only  proper  and  primitive  Church 
system.    They  exerted  the  preponderating  influence  in 
the  Ecclesiastical  Committee,  and  the  plan  of  the  new 
Church  constitution  was  presented  to  the  Assembly  by 
Martmeau,  one  of  the  most  respectable  adherents  of 


92         Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

that  sect.  The  Assembly  now  became  a  theological 
battle-field.  The  combatants  were  the  two  parties 
which  for  ages  had  divided  the  French  Chnrch,  and  the 
audience  and  judges  of  the  contest  were  the  disciples  of 
Voltaire  and  Rousseau.  Surely  it  was  a  strange  place 
to  determine  questions  of  Christian  doctrine. 

Before  noticing  the  debate  let  us  give  the  outlines  of 
the  proposed  Church  constitution.  It  interfered  with  the 
old  bishoprics,  and  gave  entirely  new  boundaries  to  the 
ecclesiastical  districts,  adopting  the  new  political  di- 
vision into  eighty-three  departments.  All  bishoprics 
lying  outside  of  these  limits  were  suppressed.  The 
kingdom  embraced  only  ten  metropolitan  districts.  It 
was  unlawful  for  any  French  citizen  to  recognize  in  any 
way  the  authority  of  any  Bishop  or  Metropolitan,  in 
person  or  by  delegate,  whose  see  lay  in  the  jurisdiction  of 
any  foreign  power.  This  article  amounted  almost  to  an 
abolition  of  the  Papal  authority  over  the  French  Church. 
Many  titles  and  offices  were  Suppressed.  The  cathedral 
church  became  a  mere  parish  church.  The  seminaries 
were  reduced  to  the  number  of  bishoprics.  A  much 
more  radical  measure  was  that  which  took  fiom  the 
bishop  the  sovereign  power  in  his  own  diocese,  and  asso- 
ciated with  him  a  permanent  council  composed  of  the 
vicars  and  the  seminary  directors,  without  whose  co-ope- 
ration he  could  perform  no  official  act.  The  parishes 
were  reduced  also.  Towns  containing  no  more  than  six 
thousand  inhabitants  could  have  only  one.  The  plan 
was  very  revolutionary  as  to  the  mode  of  distributing 
church  offices,  for  it  substituted,  in  place  of  the  canon- 
ical forms,  the  method  of  popular  election  at  the  ballot- 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  93 

box.  No  religious  test  was  required,  and  the  same  ticket 
might  odhtain  candidates  for  civil  as  well  as  for  religious 
offices.  Protestants  and  Jews  could  vote  as  well  as 
Catholics.  The  vote  was  to  take  place  immediately  after 
the  Sunday  morning  mass.  The  Metropolitan  had  the 
right  to  examine  the  Bishop  elect ;  and  the  Bishop,  the 
newly  elected  Curate.  But  neither  of  them  could  hinder 
the  candidate  elected  from  entering  upon  his  functions, 
except  by  consent  of  his  council ;  and  even  then  the  re- 
jected ones  enjoyed  a  large  liberty  of  appeal.  The 
Bishop  could  choose  his  colleagues  or  Vicars  only 
within  the  bounds  of  .his  own  diocese,  and  on  fixed  con- 
dition*. He  could  eject  them  from  office  only  after  de- 
liberation with  his  council,  and  by  a  majority  of  the 
votes.  As  to  the  salaries,  they  were  considerably  re- 
duced from  the  customary  figures.  The  Bishop  of  Paris 
alone  received  fifty  thousand  francs.  The  salaries  of  the 
other  Bishops  varied  from  twenty  to  twelve  thousand 
francs,  according  to'  the  importance  of  the  bishopric. 
Every  Church  officer  was  required  to  reside  in  the  field 
of  his  labors,  and  was  placed  under  the  surveillance  of 
the  municipal  authorities. 

This  sketch  of  the  proposed  civil  constitution  of  the 
clergy,  is  enough  to  show  its  deeply  revolutionary  char- 
acter. It  is  in  vain  that  the  apologists  of  the  French 
Revolution  attempt  to  excuse  it.  In  vain  is  it  urged, 
that  much  of  the  plan  is  in  harmony  with  the  practice 
of  the  primitive  Church.  It  was  an  excuseless  abuse  of 
power  for  a  political  assembly  to  impose  it  on  the  Church. 
But  the  blame  should  fall  partly  on  the  Church  herself. 
She  was  too  slow  in  undertaking  the  work  of  self-refor- 


9i         Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

mation.  What  a  misfortune  for  the  Church  of  France, 
that  she  did  not  sooner  share  the  spirit  of  reform  which 
animated  the  generation  of  1789  ! 

The  discussion  of  the  project  of  the  Church  constitu- 
tion opened  May  29th,  1790.  Little  dignity  of  temper 
was  manifested.  The  High-church  party  had  expended 
their  sublimest  nights  of  eloquence  in  supporting  the 
motion  of  Dom  Gerle.  It  produced  little  effect  to  go 
through  the  same  protestations  a  second  time.  It  was 
equally  vain  for  them,  on  different  occasions,  to  rise  in  a 
body  and  leave  the  hall.  These  sudden  secessions  to  the 
Sacred  Mount,  and  equally  sudden  returns,*  became  at 
last  ludicrous.  The  Archbishop  of  Aix  expressed,  with 
deep  emotion,  the  grief  and  indignation  of  his  party. 
He  said,  with  justice  :  "  Religious  truths  are  at  stake. 
The  purely  spiritual  jurisdiction  is  involved.  The  Church 
alone  can  govern  the  spiritual."  Treilhard  sustained  the 
project  with  his  cold  and  relentless  argumentation.  He 
pointed  out  the  justice  of  a  scheme  which  abolished 
some  of  the  crying  abuses  of  the  old  system.  It  was 
much  better  to  elect  the  Bishops  by  simple  vote  than  to 
subject  their  appointment  to  all  the  scandalous  intrigues 
of  a  corrupt  court.  The  successor  of  Judas  had  been 
elected  by  popular  vote.  All  of  this  was  true  enough,  but 
it  did  not  touch  the  essential  part  of  the  question, 
namely,  the  right  of  a  political  assembly  to  impose  its 
laws  on  the  Church.  Several  Curates  argued  in  favor  of 
the  project  with  a  great  show  of  patriotic  texts  and  of 
citations  from  Church  history.  An  important  feature  in 
this  debate  was  the  intervention  of  Robespierre.  He 
supported  the  proposed  plan  on  the  principles,  and  with 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  95 

all  the  intolerance,  of  Rousseau.  A  civil  religion  was  one 
of  Rousseau's  most  cherished  ideas.  Desirous  of  securing 
to  the  multitude  an  unlimited  sovereignty,  which  he 
mistook  for  liberty,  he  saw  that  the  greatest  danger 
thereto  would  arise  from  those  free  beliefs  of  the  soul 
which  are  beyond  the  reach  of  the  despotism  of  the  ma- 
jority. He  had,  therefore,  in  his  ideal  republic,  sacri- 
ficed the  liberty  of  conscience  to  his  hundred-headed 
idol  the  populace,  and  conferred  on  the  latter  the  right 
of  imposing  a  religion  on  the  whole  population  on  pain 
of  banishment  or  death.  Robespierre  defended  these 
fine  maxims  at  the  bar  of  the  Assembly  with  all  the  as- 
surance of  a  popular  demagogue.  He  argued  that  it  be- 
longed to  the  Assembly  to  determine  what  and  how 
many  churchly  functions  should  be  permitted  in  the 
.land.  He  even  went  so  far  as  to  insinuate  that  the 
people  had  the  right  to  give  wives  to  their  priests,  in 
order  to  identify  their  interest  more  closely  with  that  ol 
the  nation.  This  was  to  commit  the  highest  outrage  on 
the  religious  conscience;  and  it  was  easy  to  see  how 
little  would  remain  to  God  when  the  Casar  of  dema- 
gogism  had  obtained  all  that  he  claimed. 

After  the  usual  amount  of  discussion,  the  proposed 
civil  constitution  of  the  clergy  was  adopted  almost  as  at 
first  presented.  The  article  forbidding  to  recognize  the 
authority  of  foreign  Bishops  was  so  modified  as  to  work 
no  prejudice  to  the  unity  of  the  faith,  and  to  the  com- 
munion with  the  visible  head  of  the  Church.  But  the 
only  communion  now  possible  was  of  a  mystical  char- 
acter. When  it  was  objected  that  the  primitive  popular 
elections  were  held  among  the  members  of  the  Church, 


96  Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror \ 

and  not  among  a  confused  mass  of  the  populace,  it  was 
ruthlessly  replied  by  Robespierre,  that  the  people  of 
France  were  fully  competent  to  elect  their  priests,  and 
that  they  were  equally  as  pure  as  the  clergy.  One  of  the 
articles,  which  was  voted  almost  without  debate,  was 
pregnant  with  trouble  and  commotion.  It  required  the 
newly  elected  clergy  to  swear  fidelity  to  .the  nation,  and 
to  support  with  all  their  power  the  National  Constitu- 
tion voted  by  the  Assembly.  This  Constitution  was  not 
simply  political,  but  involved  also  the  organization  of 
the  Church ;  and  such  an  oath  was  calculated  to  awake 
the  most  serious  religious  scruples.  The  thought  which 
pervaded  the  whole  of  this  Church  scheme  was  well  ex- 
pressed by  Camus  when  he  said :  "  The  Church  is  in  the 
State,  the  State  is  not  in  the  Church.  We  are  a  National 
Convention ;  surely  we  have  a  right  to  change  the  relig- 
ion." But  this  was  to  forget  that  liberty  consists,  not 
in  extending  the  sovereignty  of  the  State,  but  rather  in 
limiting  it,  in  checking  it  to  the  profit  of  personal  liberty. 
The  result  will  show  that  the  most  democratic  of  gov- 
ernments cannot  infringe  with  impunity  on  the  sacred 
domain  of  private  belief. 

A  question  remained  to  be  settled,  namely,  whether 
the  article  relating  to  the  salaries  of  the  priests  should 
be  retroactive,  or  whether  it  should  affect  only  those  who 
should  be  elected  in  the  future.  Should  it  be  applied  to 
high  functionaries  who  had  entered  orders  on  conditions 
the  abrogation  of  which  they  could"  not  have  foreseen  ? 
After  a  lively  discussion,  and  despite  the  ridiculous  pro- 
test of  a  certain  Deputy  in  favor  of  a  financial  compen- 
sation for  the  unfortunates  who  had  vowed  an  eternal 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  97 

isolation  from  the  fair  sex,  the  article  was  pronounced 
retroactive.    It  was  decreed  that  from  the  1st  of  Jan- 
uary, 1791,  such  salaries  of  Archbishops  and  Bishops  as 
did  not  exceed  twelve  thousand  francs  should  suffer  nf 
reduction,  and  that  those  'exceeding  that  sum  should  be- 
reduced  to  twelve  thousand  francs  plus  the  half  of  the 
excess  of  the  previous  amount  over  that  sum,  provided 
that  the  whole  should  not  exceed  thirty  thousand  francs. 
The  only  exception  was  the  Archbishop  of  Paris,  who 
was  allowed  seventy-five  thousand  francs.    Such  was  the 
famous  Constitution  of  the  Clergy  as  finally  amended 
and  adopted.    We  may  add  that  it  was  put  into  opera- 
tion as  soon  as  decreed. 

It  is  just  to  offer,  in  excuse  of  the- Revolution,  the  fact 
that  this  scheme  of  Church  organization  is  nothing  more 
than  a  rigid  application  of  the  maxims  of  the  ancient 
monarchy.     It  was  simply  ultra-Gallicanism.    An  ex- 
amination of  the  report  already  mentioned,  concerning 
tfee  power  of  the  King  in  Church  affiurs,  which  was 
drawn  up  for  Louis  XIV.  by  one  of  his  masters  of  re- 
quests,  M.  Le  Vayer  de  Boutigny,  furnishes  sufficient 
evidence  of  this  fact.     This  wise  lawyer  distinguishes  ' 
in  the  Church  two  bodies,  the  mystical  and  the  po- 
litical.   All  that  relates  to  the  latter  belongs  to  the 
King  without  dispute.     But  the  King  is  not  only  mag- 
istrate, he  is  also  protector  of  the  Church.    In  the  latter 
character  he  has  a  wide  sway  over  the  mystical  body 
also.    He  does  not  touch  the  creed  so  far  as"  it  is  merely 
theoretical,  but  as  soon  as  it  manifests  itself  in  public 
acts  it  foils  under  his  direction.    He  must  watch  that 
the  Gospel  be  not  so  preached  as  to  work  detriment 

13 


98  Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

to  the  laws  or  to  the  loyalty  of  his  subjects.  The  pre- 
cise time  and  manner  of  preaching  is  not  essential  to 
salvation,  therefore  "  the  King  has  the  power  to  regulate 
the  choice  of  the  person  who  preaches,  as  well  as  the 
place  and  hour  of  the  preaching."  Prayer  is  necessary, 
but  it  must  be  regulated  and  authorized  by  the  King. 
Church  councils  are  necessary,  but  it  is  the  right  of  the 
King  to  authorize  them,  to  convoke  them,  and  even  to 
dissolve  them,  when  they  cause  trouble.  In  fine,  there 
is  scarcely  a  single  function  of  the  Church  which  does 
not,  in  one  way  or  other,  fall  under  the  power  of  the 
King.  "What  he  cannot  do  as  magistrate  he  may  well 
assume  to  perform  as  protector.  According  to  this  royal 
counselor  the  Church  is  like  a  ship ;  the  helm  is  in  the 
hands  of  the  spiritual  authority,  but  the  captain  who 
gives  the  orders  is  the  State.  The  comparison  is  worthy 
the  age  of  Louis  XIV.,  and  reveals  the  spirit  of  the 
system.  The  boldest  measures  of  the  French  Revolu- 
tion in  regard  to  the  Church  were  thus  justified,  in  ad- 
vance, by  abundant  governmental  precedent. 

~No  one,  however,  thought  of  this,  or  acted  from  these 
reasons.  The  parties  were  divided  into  two  hostile 
camps.  On  the  one  side  were  the  sticklers  for  the  old 
order  of  things ;  on  the  other,  the  reformers,  who  were 
still  too  much  under  the  domination  of  tradition.  The 
former  imagined  that  the  foundations  of  society  were 
overturned,  when  in  fact  only  the  maxims  of  their  fa- 
thers were  turned  against  them  ;  but  their  exasperation 
knew  no  bounds,  and  an  opposition  sprang  up  in  all 
France  which  was  destined  to  provoke  the  Assembly  to 
further  injustice  and  violence. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  99 


CHAPTER  IV. 

FIRST  RESISTANCE  OF  THE  CLERGY  TROUBLE  AT  NIMES 

AND  MONTAUBAN  POLITICAL   OATH  IMPOSED  ON  THE 

CLERGY  PATHETIC  SCENE  IN  THE  ASSEMBLY  AD- 
DRESS OF  MIRABEAU  TO  THE  NATION  PAMPHLET  OF 

CAMILLE  DESMOULINS. 

The  spirit  of  liberty  had,  at  the  close  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  visited  more  than  one  cloister,  and  found  wel- 
come from  not  a  few  of  the  dignitaries  of  the*  French 
episcopate.  We  firmly  believe  that  the  Revolution,  had 
it  not  violated  the  sanctuary  of  religious  scruples,  might 
have  rallied  to  the  cause  of  reform  the  greater  part  of  the 
French  Church.  The  majority  of  the  Chamber  of  the 
Clergy  had  joined  the  Third  Estate  even  before  the  King's 
willingness  thereto  was  known.  This  fact  should  surely 
have  counseled  a  conciliatory  policy ;  but  we  have  seen 
that  the  Assembly  rushed  into  the  opposite  extreme, 
and  thus  awoke  an  opposition  which  was  the  more 
dangerous  as  it  was  completely  armed  and  organized. 
This  opposition  irritated  the  Assembly,  and  led  it  to 
persist  in  and  multiply  its  faults.  It  came  to  regard 
the  clergy  as  an  enemy,  to  crush  which  any  and  every 
means  was  lawful.  In  order  to  understand  the  events 
which  induced  the  Assembly  to  impose  the  political 
oath  on  the  clergy  we  must  notice  the  progress  of  the 
religious  reaction  in  the  provinces. 

It  was  the  Revolution  which  began  the  contest.  The 


100        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

people  of  Paris,  at  first  favorable  enough  to  the  priests, 
soon  began  to  regard  their  peculiar  costume  as  the  sym- 
bol of  the  old  regime.  After  the  stormy  debates  on  the 
Church  property,  the  clergy  were  often  exposed  to  insult 
in  the  streets.  In  October,  1789,  Gregory  had  com- 
plained that  the  people  of  Paris,  ignorant  of  the  pa-, 
triotism  of  the  Curates,  outraged  them,  and  addressed  to 
them  the  most  furious  threats.  In  the  same  month  the 
Archbishop  of  Paris  was  compelled  publicly  to  defend 
himself  against  the  accusation  "  of  having  in  the  pres- 
ence Of  the  King  supported  the  interests  of  the  rich  and 
powerful  against  the  poor  and  feeble."  He  demanded 
a  passport,  and  initiated  the  flight  or  emigration  of  the 
clergy.  About  this  time  an  impassioned  letter  of  a 
Brittany  Bishop  excited  the  fanaticism  to  a  flame.  He 
assumed  openly  the  martyr  role  of  a  Thomas  a  Becket. 
It  was.  a  veritable  war  clarion.  "  Religion  is  annihi- 
lated," cried  he ;  "  its  ministers  are  reduced  to  the  sad 
condition  of  hirelings  appointed  by  brigands."  Relig- 
ious liberty  was  openly  execrated  in  this  episcopal  as- 
sault, and  the  nobility  and  peasantry  were  summoned 
to  a  coalition  against  the  Third  Estate.  This  impru- 
dent provocation  occasioned  a  lively  debate  in  the 
Assembly,  and  an  order  for  the  Bishop  to  appear  in 
court  to  answer  a  charge  of  treason.  The  clerical  op- 
position increased  with  each  new  invasion  of  the  old 
organization  of  the  Church.  The  decree  confiscating 
the  Church  property  was  a  signal  for  a  general  active 
opposition.  In  several  provinces  the  nobility  and  clergy 
held  their  Assemblies  just  as  if  no  changes  had  been 
made  in  the  laws.    The  National  Assembly  thereupon 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror,  101 

ordered,  that  until  further  authorization  no  provincial 
Parliament  should  be  called  together.  The  order  was 
resisted  at  Rouen  and  Metz.  In  the  latter  city  the 
high  clergy  held  factious  meetings.  Civil  war  was  im- 
minent in  Provence.  The  Bishops  were  busy  kindling 
the  irritation  in  the  excitable  hearts  of  the  South.  The 
order  to  make  an  inventory  of  the  property  of  the  mon- 
asteries set  the  whole  South  on  fire.  The  convents 
seemed  on  a  sudden  to  have  become  the  asylum  of 
every  human  and  divine  virtue.  Every-where  the  ma- 
gistrates had  to  press  their  way  through  a  dense  mass 
of  furious  populace,  to  whom  their  work  seemed  an 
abominable  profanation.  It  needed  but  a  spark  to 
kindle  an  open  insurrection.  And  it  soon  actually 
broke  out,  especially  in  places  where  Protestant  socie- 
ties existed.  The  fervid  Catholics  of  the  South  could 
not  pardon  to  Protestants  the  crfme  of  daring  to  exist, 
and  of  being  no  longer  under  the  ban  of  proscription. 
For  this-populace  the  proclamation  of  religious  equality 
was  the  great  crime  of  the  Revolution. 

Civil  war  broke  out  openly  as  soon  as  the  Assembly 
refused  to  declare  the  Catholic  religion  the  Church  of 
the  nation.  The  ignorant  and  superstitious  masses  of 
Nimes,  TTzes,  and  Montauban  showed  as  much  fury 
against  those  who  had  abolished  an  odious  privilege  as 
the  people  of  Paris  had  exhibited  against  its  champions. 
But  violence  was  the  law  of  both  parties,  and  liberty  - 
was  destined  to  be  enfeebled  and  wounded  in  the  con- 
test. As  soon  as  the  defeat  of  the  motion  of  Dom  Gerle 
was  known  in  the  South,  the  clergy  began  to  excite  the 
people  to  send  violent  protests  to  the  Assembly.  In 


102        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

April,  1790,  a  large  meeting  was  held  at  Mmes  in  the 
church  of  the  White  Penitents.  They  petitioned  unani- 
mously in  favor  of  the  ancient  state  of  things.  This 
meeting  was  preceded  and  followed  by  exhibitions  of 
Catholic  effervescence.  Wherever  they  caught  sight  of 
a  Protestant  the  cry  was,  "  Kill  him !  kill  him ! "  Simi- 
lar scenes  took  place  at  Uzes  and  in  Alsace.  In  the 
latter  province  the  Jews  were  sadly  maltreated.  Surely 
the  Catholic  party  was  unfortunate  in  its  mode  of  pro- 
cedure. It  strove  to  obtain  the  rights  of  conscience  by 
petitioning  that  these  rights  should  be  blotted  from  the 
constitution  of  the  country ;  but  this  inconsistency  will 
surprise  no  one  who  understands  how  manifold  are  the 
tortuosities  of  the  human  heart.  The  Assembly  or- 
dered procedure  against  the  abettors  of  the  troubles  at 
Nimes,  and  summoned  to  its  bar  (despite  the  invoca- 
tion in  their  favor,  by  Malouet,  of  the  rights  of  meeting 
and  discussion)  the  chief  signers  of  the  petition.  But 
the  trouble  did  not  cease.  The  news  of  the  adoption  of 
the  Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy  intensified  the  dis- 
pleasure of  the  South.  In  the  months  of  May  and 
June  it  took,  at  Nimes,  all  the  features  of  earnest  war. 
The  opposition  arose  not  from  fanaticism  alone,  but 
rather  from  fanaticism  used  as  a  tool  by  the  party  of 
the  old  regime.  This  is  clear  from  the  declaration  of 
Froment,  the  chief  exciter  of  these  troubles.  "One 
strong  passion,"  said  he,  "  cannot  be  quenched  except 
by  exciting  a  still  stronger  one ;  consequently  the  re- 
publican mania  can  only  be  counteracted  by  calling  into 
play  a  zeal  for  religion."  The  struggle  broke  out  at 
the  municipal  elections.    The  Catholic  party  at  Nimes, 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  103 

always  fanatical  and  determined  not  to  tolerate  relig- 
ious equality  before  the  law,  firmly  resolved  to  prevent 
the  election  of  Protestants.    Their  rage  knew  no  bounds 
when  they  learned  of  the  honor  conferred  by  the  Na- 
tional Assembly  in  April  on  Rabaut  St.  Etienne.  A 
placard  was  put  up  bearing  these  insulting  words: 
"  The  infamous  National  Assembly  has  just  capped  the 
climax  of  its  iniquities  by  electing  as  its  president  a 
Protestant."    A  league  was  formed.    Troops  of  zealous 
Catholics,  with  a  special  badge,  calling  themselves  the 
Companies  of  the  Cross,  were  formed  in  opposition  to  the 
National  Guard,  which  latter  was  composed  of  all  classes 
of  citizens.    Every  means  was  used  to  work  up  the  feel- 
ings.   Nocturnal  meetings  were  held  in  the  churches, 
and  violent  harangues  delivered.    Incendiary  pamphlets 
representing  religion  as  proscribed,  and  the  King  as  in 
captivity,  were  spread  abroad.    In  these  libels  the  Prot- 
ectants were  described  as  venomous  serpents,  whom 
numbness  alone  had  hitherto  kept  from  harming,  but 
who,  now  that  they  were  recalled  to  life  by  favors,  were 
engaged  in  plotting  vengeance  and.  death.    The  strug- 
gle broke  out  June  13,  by  an  assault  of  the  champions 
of  the  cross  on  the* roops  of  the  Guard.   The  day  previous 
the  peasantry  had  rushed  in  from  the  country,  but  had 
mostly  returned  home  as  soon  as  they  learned  that  they 
were  desired  to  defend  the  counter-revolution.  The 
Protestants  of  the  neighborhood  had  also  taken  the 
alarm  and  flocked  to  the  city.    They  would  also  have 
returned,  had  they  not  been  violently  attacked  from  the 
convent  of  the  Capuchins.    Furious  at  this  assault,  they 
rushed  upon  the  Catholic  companies.    Finally  a  parley 


104:        Religion  a/nd  the  Reign  of  Terror, 

for  peace  was  entered  upon.  This  was  interrupted  ab 
the  order  of  the  royalist  Froment,  who  was  posted  at 
the  castle,  by  an  attack  with  musketry.  ■  This  traitorous 
act  broke  up  all  hope  of  peace,  and  delivered  the  city  to 
the  rage  of  the  justly  exasperated  Protestants  and  re- 
publicans. More  than  three  hundred  Catholics  were 
slain  in  the  city ;  while  in  the  neighboring  ccnmtry  the  scale 
was  reversed,  and  the  blood  of  Protestants  was  freely 
shed.  Impartial  history  must  admit  that  the  misfor- 
tunes at  Nimes  were  the  natural  fruit  of  an  abominable 
plot  worthy  the  days  of  St.  Bartholomew.  The  party 
which  provoked  them  was  not  defending  the  liberties  of 
the  Church,  but  rather  its  odious  privileges  and  intol- 
erance. 

Similar  events  had  taken  place  previously  at  Montau- 
ban.  The  civil  officers  had  succeeded  in  selling  the 
suppressed  convents  only  at  the  risk  of  their  lrves. 
They  had  been  compelled  to  face  the  rage  of  a  multi- 
tude rendered  furious  by  the  exhortations  of  a  Bishop. 
They  met,  at  the  threshold,  crowds  of  groaning  women 
on  their  knees  to  defend  the  sanctuary.  The  town-hall 
had  been  assaulted,  and  six  guards,  of  whom  five  were 
Protestants,  massacred.  Others  had  been  dragged  to 
the  cathedral,  waxen  tapers  in  their  hands,  to  do  satis- 
factory penance.  The  Assembly,  on  hearing  report  of 
these  proceedings,  was  exasperated  to  severe  measures, 
and  tempted  more  and  more  to  view  the  Church  as  its 
enemy. 

These  small  skirmishes,  however,  were  of  much  less 
consequence  than  the  general  resistance  which,  under 
the  leadership  of  the  high  clergy,  was  organized  all  over 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  105 

the  land.  However  justly  the  Church  may  have  felt  her- 
self aggrieved,  it  was  a  great  blunder  for  her  to  identify 
the  cause  of  her  liberty  (which  was,  in  fact,  attacked)  with 
the  cause  of  monarchical  despotism  and  churchly  intol- 
erance. Her  struggle  for  her  well-grounded  rights  was 
fully  equaled  by  her  struggle  against  the  liberties  of 
the  people.  In  this  period,  we  must  distinguish  between 
what  was  really  plotted  and  what  was  actually  accom- 
plished. The  latter  was  infinitely  less  than  the  former. 
The  violent  official  charges  of  the  French  Bishops  were 
of  much  less  importance  than  the  influences  which  were 
sent  out  from  Rome.  Pope  Pius  VI.  was  in  frequent 
correspondence  with  both  the  King  and  the  high  clergy. 
From  the  month  of  March  1790,  he  assumed  an  attitude 
openly  hostile  to  the  Revolution,  not  only  defending 
his  just  rights,  but  also  combating  at  the  same  time  all 
reforms,  even  the  most  legitimate.  At  this  date  he  ex- 
pressed, in  an  official  meeting,  great  grief  at  every  thing 
which  had  taken  place  in  France  since  the  convocation 
of  the  States-General,  and  declared  that  the  ancient  mon- 
archy had  been  brought  by  its  own  children  to  the  very 
brink  of  ruin.  He  condemned  the  National  Assembly 
for  having  decreed  liberty  of  conscience,  and  grew  in- 
dignant that  non-Catholics  had  been  declared  eligible  to 
office.  He  treated  political  liberty  as  a  vain  phantom, 
and  deprecated  the  limitation  of  the  royal  authority  as 
incapacitating  the  Most  Christian  King  for  revenging 
the  rights  of  the  Church.  Thus  he  was  guilty  of  con- 
demning the  simplest  principles  of  modem  civilization, 
and  bewailing  the  abolition  of  odious  ancient  abuses. 

This  subtracted  greatly  from  the  force  of  his  just  com- 

14 


106        Religion  mid  the  Reign  of  Terror, 

plaints,  for  the  cause  which  he  anathematized  was  im- 
measurably more  just  than  that  which  he  defended.  He 
cursed  the  cause  of  young  France,  and  put  himself  at 
the  head  of  the  political  reaction.  During  the  next 
year  it  was  believed  at  Rome,  for  a  few  days,  that  the 
King  had  escaped  from  France.  Immediately  the  Pope 
wrote  him  a  letter  expressing  great  joy  that  he  had  suc- 
ceeded in  escaping  from  that  abominable  city  of  Paris, 
and  his  firm  belief  that  he  would  soon  be  able  to  return 
as  conqueror,  and  restore  the  ancient  state  of  things. 
During  the  interval  between  the  adoption  of  the  civil  Con- 
stitution of  the  Clergy  and  its  sanction  by  the  King,  the 
letters  of  the  Pope  to  the  latter  and  to  the  Bishops  of 
France,  were  very  numerous.  They  uniformly  counseled 
hostility  to  the  decrees  of  the  Assembly.  The  sanction 
of  the  Clerical  Constitution  by  the  Pope  had  been  ear- 
nestly sought.  His  hesitation  and  long  delay  irritated 
the  Assembly  to  fresh  acts  of  imprudence.  The  putting 
into  practical  execution  of  the  new  Constitution  of  the 
Clergy  was  the  occasion  of  intense  opposition  on  the 
part  of  the  high  clergy.  They  exhorted  the  people  to 
resistance,  declared  that  in  such  matters  God  should  be 
obeyed  rather  than  man,  and  branded  all  priests  who 
should  take  office  under  the  new  system  as  intruders. 
Riots  broke  out  at  various  places.  Vengeance  on  the 
Protestants  for  the  blood  shed  at  Nimes  was  loudly 
called  for.  The  civil  officers  were  resisted  in  many 
places. 

In  these  circumstances  a  very  unfortunate  step  was 
taken  by  the  Assembly.  A  Deputy,  after  reviewing  the 
hostility  of  the  clergy,  uttered  these  ruthless  words: 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  107 

"Ministers  of  religion,  cease  to  seek  pretexts;  acknowl- 
edge your  weakness.    You  regret  your  former  opulence, 
your  marks  of  distinction  and  pretended  pre-eminence. 
Recollect  that  the  Revolution  has  made  all  of  us  men. 
It  is  yet  time;  disarm,  by  a  prompt  submission,  the 
popular  resentment  against  your  order.    The  decree  I 
am  about  to  present  is  less  a  law  of  severity  than  a 
measure  of  indulgence."    This  indulgent  measure  con- 
sisted in  requiring  all  who  held  positions  in  the  Church 
to  take  an  oath  to  support  and  obey,  not  only  the  laws 
of  the  land  in  general,  but  also  to  maintain  with  all 
their  power  the  Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy  as  de- 
creed by  the  Assembly,  and  that,  on  pain  of  ejection 
from  office,  forfeiture  of  pension,  and  loss  of  French  cit- 
izenship.   Nothing  could  have  been  more  impolitic  than 
this.    It  would  have  been  just  to  require  an  oath  of 
submission  to  the  civil  laws,  but  to  extend  it  to  the  new 
Constitution  of  the  Clergy  was  to  outrage  the  conscience 
of  many  respectable  priests.    But  the  hour  of  reason 
and  justice  was  well-nigh  past.     The  radicals  of  the 
Assembly  wished  to  crush  their  enemy.     The  debate 
opened  in  a  perfect  tempest  of  passion.    Its  most  im- 
portant feature  was  a  magnificent,  but  illogical  and 
unfortunate  oration,  of  Mirabeau.    Left  to  himself  in 
the  calmness  of  solitary  reflection,  he  rarely  went  astray. 
But  he  was  capable  of.  being  swayed  by  the  storm  of 
the  popular  fury.    He  seems  not  to  have  seen  that  the 
Constitution  of  the  Clergy,  and  especially  this  proposed 
oath,  were  in  violation  of  his  own  cherished  principles 
of  the  liberty  of  conscience.    He  pretended,  that  the 
priests  had  been  so  recreant  to  the  cause  of  religion. 


108        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror, 

that  the  National  Assembly  was  compelled  to  take  the 
Church  under  its  own  patronage,  not  perceiving  that  the 
greatest  compliment  a  government  can  make  to  religion 
consists  simply  in  letting  it  alone.  "  It  is,"  said  he,  "  at 
the  very  moment  when  we  have  confessed,  in  the  face 
of  all  nations  and  of  all  ages,  that  God  is  as  necessary 
as  liberty  to  the  French  people,  that  our  Bishops  are 
pleased  to  denounce  us  as  violators  of  the  rights  of  re- 
ligion." His  power  was  terrible  in  the  part  of  his  dis- 
course where  he  exposed  the  scandalous  corruptions  of 
the  clergy  under  the  old  system.  The  true  intruders 
into  the  ministry  were,  thought  he,  those  courtier  priests 
who  lived  in  luxury  and  intrigue.  Toward  the  close  he 
grew  too  violent  even  for  the  radical  left,  and  Petion  op- 
posed some  of  his  arguments.  Among  the  warmest  ad- 
vocates of  this  oath  was  the  Jansenist  Camus.  He 
loved  it  because  it  trampled  under  foot  the  pretensions 
of  Ultramontanism  and  the  power  of  the  Papacy,  from 
which  his  sect  had  suffered  so  much.  During  the  debate, 
a  certain  priest  had  cried  out  to  the  Assembly  this  preg- 
nant warning :  "  Take  care,  it  is  not  wise  to  make  mar- 
tyrs." Finally,  the  decree  requiring  the  oath  of  the 
clergy  was  passed  on  the  27th  of  November,  1790.  This 
is  a  sad  date  in  the  history  of  the  Revolution.  It  con- 
summated the  divorce  between  young  France  and  re- 
ligion, and  led  to  still  more  flagrant  violations  of  liberty 
by  the  very  party  whose  most  earnest  desire  was  to 
establish  and  sanction  it.  The  cause  of  right  cannot  be 
served  by  the  arbitrary. 

This  decree  set  all  France  into  ferment.  The  revolu- 
tionary press  brandished  it  as  a  sword  in  the  face  of  all 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  109 

reactionary  priests.  The  King,  who  thus  far  had  tried 
to  reconcile  his  duties  as  Sovereign  with  his  conscience 
as  a  Catholic,  saw  himself  reduced  to  the  desperate  di- 
lemma where  any  decision  was  equally  fatal,  and  where 
resistance  was  as  impossible  as  concession.  To  sanction 
the  decree  was  to  break  with  Rome;  to  veto  it  was 
vainly  to  attempt  to  brave  the  triumphant  Revolution. 
The  unhappy  prince  stood  between  excommunication  on 
the  one  hand,  and  dethronement  on  the  other.  In  his 
despair  he  now  formed  a  plan  of  escaping  from  France, 
and  calling  to  the  support  of  his  throne  the  arms  of  for- 
eigners. In  December  he  wrote  to  the  King  of  Prussia, 
imploring  aid  against  his  factious  subjects.  It  is  at  this 
period  that  the  force  of  circumstances  led  him  into  that 
course  of  double-dealing  toward  the  Assembly  which 
was  so  foreign  to  his  generous  nature.  The  Assembly 
would  not  tolerate  his  veto ;  its  President,  at  two  dif- 
ferent times,  demanded  in  imperious  terms  that  he  should 
sanction  it.  The  King  was  conquered.  His  letter  of 
sanction  may  be  regarded  as  his  moral  abdication,  so 
thoroughly  is  it  imbued  with  the  spirit  of  humiliation. 
But  he  still  cherished  hope.  That  same  day  he  had  let 
drop  the  bitter  words,  "  I  would  rather  be  King  of  Metz 
than  remain  King  of  France  under  these  circumstances." 

Scarcely  had  the  decree  been  sanctioned  when  the  As- 
sembly took  measures  for  its  immediate  execution.  It 
forthwith  summoned  the  clerical  members  of  its  own 
body  to  take  the  oath.  This  was  to  lay  the  corner-stone 
of  the  counter-revolution,  for  it  provoked  a  soul-trying 
scene  in  which  all  the  honor  was  on  the  side  of  the  high 
clergy.    No  description  can  do  it  justice.    A  vast  mul- 


110        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

titude,  ready  to  break  out  into  riot,  surrounded  the 
doors  of  the  Assembly.  The  voice  of  the  tribune  was 
drowned  in  the  applause  or  hisses  of  the  spectators. 
The  wrath  of  the  left  was  only  equaled  by  the  impas- 
sioned indignation  of  the  right.  Words  of  moderation 
stood  no  chance  of  a  hearing.  It  was  in  vain  that  at 
different  times  Gregory  and  some  other  priests  attempted 
so  to  explain  the  oath  as  to  render  it  palatable  to  the 
main  body  of  the  clergy.  They  could  not  be  persuaded 
that  it  did  not  conflict  both  with  the  rights  of  the  Pope 
and  with  the  essential  honor  of  the  (Ihurch.  On  the  2d 
of  January,  when  the  Bishop  of  Clermont  attempted  to 
present  a  temperate  protest,  his  voice  was  covered  with 
hisses.  It  was  then  decreed  by  the  majority,  in  the 
midst  of  stormy  altercations,  that  no  opponent  of  the 
oath  should  be  allowed  to  explain  his  reasons  at  the 
tribune,  but  that  the  oath  should  be  taken  or  declined 
purely  and  simply.  At  this  the  Bishop  of  Clermont 
exclaimed,  "  I  cannot  in  good  conscience ;"  but  his  noble 
words  were  greeted  with  cries  of  rage.  However,  this 
Non  possumus  of  the  outraged  conscience  was  destined 
to  make  a  powerful  impression  throughout  the  commu- 
nity. That  same  evening  the  Bishop  published  to 
France  the  words  which  he  had  not  been  permitted  to 
utter  in  the  Assembly.  When  rudely  interrogated  in 
the  session  of  the  next  day,  he  replied  in  words  which 
cannot  be  too  well  considered,  "  It  will  be  an  eternal 
infamy  to  have  inflicted  punishment  on  those  who  refuse 
this  oath ;  for  it  is  saying  to  them,  Whatever  your 
conscience  may  say  to  the  contrary,  take  the  oath  any- 
how."   To  put  an  end  to  the  delay,  Barnave  moved 


Religion  and  the  Reign,  of  Terror.  Ill 


what  the  clerical  members  be  allowed  only  till  the  next 
day  to  consider,  and  that  their  refusal  to  take  the 
oath  be  regarded  as  equivalent  to  resignation  of  office. 
The  members  of  the  right  could  delay  the  vote  only  a 
few  minutes.  The  spirit  of  the  majority  may  be  seen 
in  the  incident  that,  when  a  member  stated  to  the  As- 
sembly, that  by  this  precipitate  action  they  might  be 
under  the  necessity  of  expelling  sixty  or  eighty  mem- 
bers, a  large  number  of  voices  exclaimed,  "  So  much  the 
better!"  It  is  plain  that  the  ultra-radicals  were  only 
too  willing  to  find  a  pretext  for  driving  from  the  As- 
sembly every  representative  of  the  ancient  order  of 
things.    The  motion  of  Barnave  was  carried. 

It  was  in  the  session  of  January  4th,  1791,  that  the 
grand  scene  of  refusing  the  oath  commenced.  It  was  the 
counterpart  of  that  which  had  immortalized  the  tennis- 
court  at  Versailles.  None  but  a  prejudiced  spirit  can 
fail  to  see  its  moral  grandeur.  I  know  that  conservative 
political  passions  and  an  unfortunate  love  of  the  old 
abuses  and  privileges  of  tlie  Church  were  mingled  with 
the  nobler  principles  which  led  to  a  refusal  of  this  in- 
iquitous oath ;  still,  it  is  none  the  less  true  that  on  that 
day  religion  vindicated  and  safeguarded  its  right  and 
honor,  in  the  midst  of  great  danger  and  at  the  cost  of 
great  sacrifices.  The  effervescence  of  the  populace  was 
extreme.  At  the  moment  when  the  President  of  the 
Assembly  summoned  the  clerical  members  to  take  the 
oath,  one  could  plainly  hear  in  the  silence  which  ensued 
the  ominous  clamor  of  the  multitude  without,  whose 
only  idea  of  liberty  was  the  indulgence  of  their  own 
good  pleasure.    No  one  having  replied  to  the  general 


112        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

call  of  the  President,  the  call  by  name  began.  The 
Bishop  of  Agen  was  the  first  one  called.  When  he  rose 
and  began  to  speak,  several  voices  from  the  radical  side 
cried  out,  "  No  words !  Take  the  oath,  yes  or  no."  The 
Bishop  remarked  calmly  and  respectfully,  "You  have 
made  a  law  requiring  all  clergymen  holding  office  to 
take  a  certain  oath,  on  pain  of  exclusion  from  oflice.  I 
regret  neither  my  position  nor  my  income ;  I  only  regret 
that  I  must  incur  the  loss  of  your  esteem,  which  I  fain 
would  merit.  I  beg  you,  therefore,  to  take  in  good  part 
the  testimony  of  the  regret  which  I  feel  in  not  being 
able  to  take  the  oath."  The  next  priest  called  was  a 
simple  curate.  He  uttered  only  these  words :  "  I  shall 
say  with  the  simplicity  of  the  first  Christians,  I  think  it 
all  glory  and  honor  to  follow  in  the  footsteps  of  my 
Bishop."  It  was  clear  that  the  call  by  name  was  turning 
to  the  disadvantage  of  the  majority,  and  serving  only  to 
give  more  eclat  to  the  refusals.  The  President  resorted 
again,  therefore,  to  the  general  call,  but  only  a  single 
oath  was  obtained.  A  member  of  the  right  asked  that 
the  Assembly  explain  the  oath,  by  decreeing  that  it  had 
no  wish  to  infringe  on  the  realm  of  the  spiritual.  "  It 
has  not  so  done,"  exclaimed  Mirabeau,  "and  that  is 
enough."  The  time  for  conciliation  was  past.  The 
Bishop  of  Poitiers  arose  and  spoke  in  these  terms :  "  I 
am  seventy  years  old ;  I  have  been  thirty-five  years  a 
Bishop ;  I  have  sought  to  do  all  the  good  in  my  power. 
Weighed  down  with  years,  I  am  not  willing  to  dishonor 
my  old  age;  I  cannot  take  the  oath."  But  these  words 
were  greeted  only  with  murmurs.  The  radicals  found 
it  necessary  to  close  the  scene.    It  was  voted  that  the 


Religion  and  the  Reicjn  of  Terror.  113 

President  should  repair  to  the  King  and  urge  him  to  en- 
force the  law  against  the  refractory  clerical  Deputies. 
The  affair  of  the  oath  was  for  many  days  a  subject  of 
ever-recurring  trouble.  For  some  it  was  a  subject  of 
remorse,  for  others  a  pretext  for  indulging  in  venom 
against  the  clergy,  and  for  all  an  occasion  of  embar- 
rassment and  discord. 

In  view  of  the  vacancies  in  the  Church,  which  the  re- 
fusal of  the  oath  would  inevitably  occasion  during  the 
year  1791,  Mirabe.au  induced  the  Assembly  to  decree 
the  eligibility  to  the  episcopate  of  every  one  who  had 
served  five  years  as  curate  in  France,  and  to  the  curacy, 
of  any  priest  who  had  held  any  Church  office  what- 
ever. Some  days  later,  Barnave,  always  ready  to  attack 
the  Bishops,  clamored  for  positive  procedure  against  the 
refractory  priests,  and  was  impolitic  enough  to  denounce 
the  political  association,  or  club,  which  the  members  of 
the  right  had  founded,  as  perfidious  and  factious.  These 
strange  and  inconsistent  words  in  the  mouth  of  a  friend 
of  liberty  excited  just  indignation  in  the  Assembly. 
"  I  demand,"  said  Malouet,  in  an  earnest  protest,  "  that 
in  the  very  bosom  of  the  Revolution,  in  the  midst  of  this 
city  which  saw  the  framing  of  the  Constitution,  and  which 
has  done  so  much  for  liberty^-I  demand  that  liberty  and 
public  and  personal  safety  be  not  outraged  with  impu- 
nity at  this  tribune."  The  decree  demanded  by  Barnave 
did  not  pass  without  exciting  firm  opposition.  Some,  of 
the  clergy  opposed,  it  from  patriotic  motives,  but  others, 
who  had  lost  all  hope  of  justice,  took  an  attitude  of 
simple  defiance.  Abbot  Maury  exclaimed,  "  Go  on,  gen- 
tlemen, go  on ;  it  will  not  be  long.    We  have  need  of 

15 


114        Beligion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

this  decree  ;  one  or  two  more  of  the  same  kind,  and  the 
work  will  be  done."  It  served  no  good  purpose,  how- 
ever, to  assume  this  defiant  attitude.  Cazales  spoke  in 
a  much  better  spirit,  for  the  same  party,  when  he  can- 
didly explained,  that  the  great  majority  of  the  clergy 
firnily  believed  that  the  principles  of  religion  forbade 
them  taking  this  oath.  "These  principles,"  said  he,  " are 
of  a  higher  order  than  the  laws  you  may  enact.  If  you 
drive  the  Bishops  and  Curates  from  their  posts  you  will 
inaugurate  a  course  of  persecution.  You  will  see  the 
Catholics  wandering  over  the  face  of  the  kingdom,  and 
following  their  deposed  ministers  into  deserts  and  caves, 
to  receive  from  their  hands  the  only  sacraments  which 
they  will  believe  to  be  valid.  Then  all  the  Catholics 
throughout  the  land,  who  cannot  accept  your  laws,  will 
be  reduced  to  the  state  of  misery  and  persecution  into 
which  the  Protestants  were  formerly  plunged  by  that 
act  which  you  so  justly  detest,  the  revocation  of  the 
Edict  of  Xantes.  Even  if  the  Church  of  France  should 
be  mistaken,  still  there  are  laws  which,  though  srood  in 
themselves,  should  not,  under  all  circumstances,  be  en- 
acted. If  your  laws  cannot  be  executed  without  vio- 
lence, it  would  be  prudent  to  hesitate  before  plunging 
France  into  bloody  civil  convulsions."  Mirabeau  elicited 
applause  by  observing,  cynically,  that  the  speaker  prob- 
ably mistook  his  wishes  for  his  fears.  The  sequel,  how- 
ever, showed  that  Cazales  was  the  better  prophet. 

About  this  time  Mirabeau  wrote,  on  the  subject  of  the 
relations  of  Church  and  State,  an  address  which  cannot 
be  too  highly  prized  by  posterity.  But  it  is  in  part  in- 
consistent with  itself    It  consecrates  the  great  princi- 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  115 

pies  of  the  necessary  freedom  of  religion  and  of  spiritual 
interests  in  general  from  the  domination  of  human  law,  , 
and  yet  justiries  the  Revolution  in  its  interference  in  the 
organization  of  the  French  Church.  "  Religion,"  said 
he,  "  is  not,  cannot,  be  a  mere  social  relation ;  it  is  the 
relation  of  the  individual  mind  to  the  mind  of  the  In- 
finite. As  it  is  absurd  to  speak  of  a  national  conscience, 
so  it  is  absurd  to  speak  of  a  national  religion.  Religion 
is  individual  and  personal.  You  camiot  establish  a 
national  religion,  for  the  reason  that  truth  is  not  estab- 
lished by  votes.  Though  men  may  be  externally  united 
by  laws,  yet  in  their  thoughts  and  conscience  they 
remain  forever  separated.  Religion,  being  but  the 
harmony  of  the  thoughts  and  heart  of  man  with  the 
divine  thought  and  heart,  cannot  be  subjected  to  a 
civil  or  legal  form.  Jesus  Christ  is  the  only  sage  who, 
in  teaching  men  how  to  be  good  and  happy,  has  not 
viewed  them  from  a  political  stand-point,  and  mingled 
in  his  instructions  the  principles  of  civil  legislation. 
Whatever  the  influence  of  the  Gospel  on  general  moral- 
ity, neither  Christ  nor  his  Apostles  gave  to  understand 
that  the  evangelical  system  was  ever  to  enter  into 
the  civil  constitution  of  nations.  The  Gospel,  in  its 
conquest  of  the  world,  simply  asks  of  men  that  they 
accept  it,  and  of  nations  that  they  suffer  it."  After  ut- 
tering these  noble  sentiments,  the  great  orator,  illogically 
enough,  attempts  to  justify  the  decree  requiring  a  polit- 
ical oath  of  the  priests. 

The  Assembly  seemed  now  to  come  to  a  consciousness 
of  danger,  from  the  largeness  of  the  party  which  its 
measures  had  offended.    Consequently  it  issued  to  the 


116        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

nation  a  conciliatory  document,  explaining  the  reasons 
which  led  to  the  enactment  of  the  offensive  laws.  It 
was  a  mere  palliative,  however,  which  subtracted  nothing 
from  the  measures  which  had  given  umbrage.  And  the 
little  good  effect  of  this  was  more  than  counteracted  by 
the  insulting  violence  of  the  demagogic  press.  Mena- 
cing documents  and  tracts,  slanderous  of  the  refractory  or 
non-juring  clergy,  were  scattered  broadcast  over  the 
nation.  From  the  9th  of  January,  1791,  the  journal  of 
Marat  had  been  encouraging  the  populace  to  hiss  and 
insult  all  priests  who  should  be  found  in  caucus,  and 
the  masses  were  but  too  ready  to  obey  such  counsel. 
Camille  Desmoulins  devoted  his  sharp  satirical  talent  to 
bringing  the  high  clergy  into  disrepute.  He  published 
a  pretended  sermon  of  a  country  priest,  which  was  a 
merciless  and  biting  assault  on  the  party  of  the  Bishops. 
These  light  but  keen  arrows  produced,  under  the  guid- 
ance of  a  steady  hand,  in  the  one  camp  a  ravishing  de- 
light, which  was  equaled  only  by  the  rage  of  the  other. 
He  had  taken  for  the  text  of  his  derisive  sermon,  the 
following  words,  attributed  to  an  aged  Cardinal,  namely: 
"  The  Bishops  were  on  the  throne,  and  religion  prostrate 
in  the  dust ;  France  has  now  put  the  Bishops  down,  and 
raised  religion  to  her  true  place."  Nothing  can  surpass 
the  sarcasm  of  the  passage  which  shows  up  the  corrup- 
tion of  the  former  clerical  elections.  He  compared  the 
concordats  to  the  compacts  of  robbers,  dividing  the 
booty  which  does  not  belong  to  them.  He  cited  the 
following  profound  saying  of  James  I. :  "  So  long  as  I 
shall  have  the  power  of  nominating  the  Judges  and  the 
Bishops,  T  shall  be  sure  of  having  laws  and  a  gospel 


.    Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  117 

which  will  please  me."  "How  little,"  exclaimed  Des- 
moulius,  "does  the  gilded  crosier  of  our  Bishops  re- 
semble the  shepherd's  staff  of  the  Apostles.  Do  you 
remember  how.  St.  Ambrose  chastised  the  impiety  of 
Theodosius?  It  was  because  that  Bishop  had  been 
elected  by  the  people  of  Milan.  But  cite  me  a  Bishop 
of  France  who  has  reproached  our  tyrants  with  their 
worthlessness,  their  cruelties,  or  their  wars.  The  gen- 
tlemen in  violet,  however  much  they  may  have  as- 
sumed a  sanctimonious  visage  and  frowning  brows 
in  their  dioceses,  yet  when  they  come  to  court,  could 
not  be  surpassed  in  affability  and  sweetness  of  words." 
As  to  a  council,  which  many  of  the  clergy  had  de- 
manded to  settle  the  pending  difficulties,  Camille  Des- 
moulins  remarked,  "The  council  of  1791  would  not 
fail  to  imitate  that  of  1179,  which  granted  as  means  of 
transportation,  to  a  rural  Dean  two  horses,  to  an  Arch- 
deacon seven  horses,  to  a  Bishop  twenty  horses,  to  an 
Archbishop  twenty-fire  horses,  to  a  Cardinal  forty 
horses.  As  to  the  Pope,  the  Fathers  of  the  Council, 
who  held  their  session  in  his  Lateran  palace,  and 
who  dined  from  his  Lateran  kitchen,  did  not  presume 
to  trace,  with  their  crosiers,  the  limits  of  his  stable,  but 
allowed  him  as  numerous  a  supply  as  that  of  King  Sol- 
omon. But  though  the  Holy  Father  was  at  this  time  very 
rich,  he  was  yet  not  rich  enough  to  have  as  many  horses 
in  his  stables  as  asses  in  his  council."  Toward  the  close  ! 
of  his  discourse,  Desmoulins  counsels  the  people  not  to 
tear  the  robes  of  the  refractory  Bishops,  but  to  be  con- 
tent  with  withholding  their  salaries.  "  Let  them  sit," 
Baid  he,  "  upon  their  episcopal  thrones,  like  Simeon  Sty- ! 


118        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

lites  on  his  column.  We  will  see  if  Heaven  sends  them 
manna,  or  a  daily  visit  of  a  raven  with  a  bill  large 
enough  to  bear  them  a  pound  loaf  of  bread.  When 
they  are  no  longer  salaried,  you  will  see  very  soon^  my 
dear  brethren,  that  that  sort  of  demons  generally  called 
Pharisees,  or  prince-priests,  non  ejicitur  nisi  per  jeju- 
nium,  go  not  out  but  by  fasting." 

A  pamphlet  like  this  belongs  to  history,  for  it  presents 
the  popular  opinion  of  the  moment  under  its  most  lively 
coloring.  It  served  as  a  violent  stimulus  to  the  party 
attacked.  The  high  clergy  might  have  fallen  back  on 
the  sentiment  of  honor,  so  powerful  in  France,  to  belie 
these  sarcasms,  and  to  prove  that  they  were  able  to  en- 
dure privation  and  even  persecution.  But  before  resign- 
ing themselves  to  martyrdom,  they  desired  to  organize 
and  resist.  They  soon  received  the  word  of  order  from 
Rome. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  110 


CHAPTER  V. 

SCHISM  IN  THE  CHURCH  CORRESPONDENCE  WITH  ROME  

DEBATE  ON  THE  LIBERTY  OF  WORSHIP  DISCOURSES  OF 

SIEVES  AND  TALLEYRAND  DISSOLUTION  OF  THE  CON- 
STITUENT ASSEMBLY. 

The  Pope*  delayed  long  his  official  answer  to  the 
Bishops  who  had  consulted  him  on  the  subject  of  the 
new  Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy,  though  his  private 
letters  gave,  clearly  to  be  seen,  what  that  answer  would 
finally  be.  Perhaps  he  awaited  events,  in  the  hope  that 
some  sudden  reaction  in  politics  might  save  the  necessity 
of  an  official  decision  which  would  inevitably  create  a 
schism  in  the  French  Church.  The  counties  of  Avignon 
and  Venaissin  had,  since  the  thirteenth  century,  formed 
a  part  of  the  temporal  possessions  of  the  Holy  Father, 
though  the  title  had  more  than  once  been  disputed  by 
the  Kings  of  France.  In  the  light  of  the  ancient  laws 
of  Europe,  the  Pope  surely  possessed  them  legally.  But 
the  new  order  of  things,  based  on  popular  sover- 
eignty, was  destined  to  come  in  conflict  with  these 
ancient  rights,  and  dispute  the  propriety  of  allowing 
this  little  establishment  to  remain  chained  to  the  usages 
of  the  Middle  Ages,  in  the  heart  of  a  nation  which  had 
gone  through  a  political  regeneration.  It  was  impossible 
to  arrest  the  contagion  of  Uberty.  The  agitation  began 
■  See  Appendix,  note  14. 


120 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 


at  Ayignon  in  March,  1790.  The  citizens  of  the  place 
had  spontaneously  given  themselves  a  liberal  municipal 
organization,  against  which  the  Pope  had  hastened  to 
protest.  They  went  a  step  further,  and  demanded  for- 
mally their  reunion  with  France.  The  friends  of  the 
reunion  persevered  in  their  purpose,  in  spite  of  bloody 
riots  which,  at  three  different  places,  broke  out  in  the 
little  territory.  They  were  not  discouraged  by  the  hes- 
itation of  the  Assembly,  which  feared  to  disturb  a  sub- 
ject involving  grave  diplomatic  difficulties,  and  which 
might  precipitate  a  European  war.  In  August,  1790, 
the  Pope  had  addressed  to  all  the  Sovereigns  of  Europe 
a  pastoral  letter,  to  prove  that  his  possession  of  this 
hand-breadth  of  earth  concerned  the  whole  of  Europe, 
and  involved  the  most  sacred  interests  of  religion.  He 
complained  bitterly  of  the  ingratitude  of  his  subjects, 
upon  whom  he  had  heaped  all  the  benefits  of  his  paternal 
regime.  This  paternal  rule,  however,  was  precisely 
what  the  people  of  Avignon  did  not  like.  The  majority 
of  the  Assembly  favored  the  scheme  of  reunion,  but  it 
was  only  after  they  had  entirely  broken  with  the  rest  of 
Europe  that  they  put  their  desires  into  effect. 

The  matter  was  discussed  in  the  Assembly  in  No- 
vember, 1790.  The  clerical  party  exhibited  a  truly  Ben- 
edictine erudition,  in  attempting  to  justify  the  Papal 
thralldom  of  Avignon.  The  more  clear-sighted  of  the 
radical  party  gave  up  the  historical  argument,  and  fell 
back  on  the  new  principle  of  popular  sovereignty,  main- 
taining boldly  that  rulers  belong  to  the  people,  and  not 
the  people  to  rulers ;  and  that  the  people  of  a  territory 
alone  have  the  right  to  choose  their  form  of  government. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  121 

After  many  delays,  the  Assembly  finally  voted,  in  Sep- 
tember, 1791,  to  reunite  Avignon  to  France,  on  condition 
of  paying  to  the  Pope  an  indemnity,  the  amount  of 
which  was  not  yet  fixed.  The  little  territory  had  al- 
ready, for  some  months,  been  occupied  militarily.  The 
Holy  Father  had,  therefore,  a  secular  as  well  as  an  eccle- 
siastical grudge  against  the  Revolution. 

About  this  epoch  three  important  documents  ema- 
nated from  Rome.  The  first  is  a  Papal  brief,  touching 
the  Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy,  dated  March  10, 
1790.  It  is  not  yet  definitive,  though  the  real  sentiments 
of  the  Pope  are  clearly  indicated.  It  condemns  flatly 
all  the  innovations  in  Church  affairs  thus  far  made  by 
the  French  Assembly.  To  this  is  added  a  general  tirade 
against  the  "  so-called  "  new  rights  of  man — the  liberty 
of  conscience,  the  liberty  of  thought,  and  the  liberty  of 
the  press.  The  brief  terminates  with  a  violent  assault 
on  Talleyrand,  Bishop  of  Autun,  in  which  he  is  de- 
nounced to  the  universal  Church  as  impious,  for  having 
taken  the  oath  to  support  the  Civil  Constitution  of  the 
Clergy.  The  example  of  the  recantation  and  martyr- 
dom of  Thomas  a  Becket  is  recommended  to  him,  while 
the  punishment  of  Heliodorus  is  denounced  against  the 
spoliators  and  profaners  of  the  sanctuary.  The  Assembly 
is  compared  to  Henry  VIII.,  and  an  approaching  excom- 
munication is  denounced  against  all  who  persist  in  the 
evil  ways  to  which  his  Holiness  takes  exception. 

This  brief  was  accompanied  by  a  letter  to  Louis  XVI., 
perfectly  adapted  to  disturb  the  Prince's  timorous  con- 
science. It  expressly  condemned  the  Civil  Constitution 
of  the  Clergy.    "  Your  Majesty,"  said  the  Pope,  "  is  en- 

16 


122        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

gaged  by  a  solemn  promise  to  live  and  die  in  the  Cath- 
olic religion.  But,  Sire,  this  promise  will  be  to  you 
henceforth  an  inexhaustible  source  of  bitterness  and  re- 
morse ;  for,  by  your  sanction,  you  have  detached  from 
the  Catholic  unity  all  those  who  have  the  weakness  to 
take  the  oath  required  by  the  Assembly."  These  and 
like  words  tended  to  render  impossible  any  conciliation, 
to  hasten  the  overthrow  of  the  throne,  and  to  bring  on 
the  mad  excesses  of  an  irritated  revolution. 

The  Bishops  deputed  to  the  Assembly  hastened  to 
reply  to  the  Pope.  They  could  but  agree  in  condemn- 
ing the  Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy,  but  they  did 
not  join  in  his  crusade  against  all  the  great  principles  of 
the  French  Revolution.  They  held  to  political  liberty  and 
equality,  to  the  distinction  of  the  civil  and  the  spiritual 
powers,  and  so  on.  At  the  close  of  their  letter,  they 
spoke  of  the  embarrassments  and  perils  of  their  situa- 
tion. "  But,  said  they,  "  we  will  submit,"  to  our  destiny, 
whatever  it  may  be,  with  that  courage  which  religion 
inspires.  Exalt  yourself,  Holy  Father,  to  the  wisdom 
and  liberty  of  your  mission.  Rise  above  all  those  per- 
sonal considerations  which  perish  with  us.  We  occupy 
but  a  small  point  in  time  and  space,  and  our  own  fate 
ought  not  to  have  the  least  weight  against  the  interests 
of  empires,  and  the  promises  of  the  Church.  We  know 
the  examples  the  Ghurch  sets  before  us,  and  we  know 
how  to  suffer  for  her.  Only  let  not  principles  suffer." 
The  Bishops  closed  by  promising  to  resign,  if  schism 
might  thereby  be  avoided.  This  letter  constitutes  a 
noble  document  in  the  religious  history  of  France;  it 
breathes  the  spirit  of  the  Christian  conscience. 


Religion  aixd  the  Reign  of  Terror,  123 

On  the  13th  of  April  the  Pope  gave  his  definitive  de- 
cision in  a  brief  addressed  to  the  whole  Church  of 
Fiance.  He  pronounced  the  new  Constitution  of  the 
Church  heretical,  protested  against  the  consecration  of 
Expilly,  the  new  Bishop  of  Quiinper,  and  against  all  the 
new  elections,  alleging  that  the  churches  belong,  not  to 
the  people,  but  to  their  chief  Pastors.  The  Pope  then 
solemnly  abjured  all  Catholics,  in  the  name  of  their 
eternal  salvation,  to  remain  faithful  to  the  ancient  laws 
of  the  Church,  and  to  the  Holy  See. 

The  matter  now  assumed  a  new  aspect.  There  were 
henceforth  two  Churches  in  France :  the  one,  constitu- 
tional and  protected  by  the  State ;  the  other,  refractory 
and  persecuted.  To  rescue  the  honor  of  the  former,  the 
hour  of  persecution  was  soon  to  come ;  for,  the  bastard 
system  on  which  it  was  organized  was  impracticable. 
And  besides,  the  wrath  of  the  people,  excited  at  first 
against  the  non-juring  clergy,  soon  forgot  the  difference 
of  the  two  Churches,  and  turned  its  fury  against  all  re- 
ligion whatever.  Out  of  one  hundred  and  thirty-one 
Bishops,  only  four  accepted  the  new  Civil  Constitution 
of  the  Clergy,  and  a  vast  multitude  of  the  inferior  clergy 
remained  faithful  to  the  Pope.  The  movement  of  oppo- 
sition took  immediately  a  wide  scope  and  an  organized 
form  throughout  the  land.  The  charges  of  the  Bishops 
to  their  clergy,  and  their  responses  to  the  summons  of 
the  Assembly  to  submit  themselves  to  its  decrees,  had 
been  filled  with  matter  of  an  inflammatory  character. 
Most  of  the  high  clergy  fled  the  country,  but  before  em- 
igrating they  laid  plans  for  exerting  a  perpetual  influ- 
ence when  they  themselves  should  be  absent. 


124    .    Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

Only  four  of  the  former  Bishops,  as  already  remarked, 
had  decided  to  take  the  oath  and  accept  the  new  order 
of  things.  These  were  Lomenie  de  Brienne,*  Archbishop 
of  Sens ;  Talleyrand,  Bishop  of  Autun ;  Jarente,  Bishop 
of  Orleans;  and  Savines,  Bishop  of  Viviers;  these,  of 
course,  remained  in  possession  of  their  dioceses.  The 
other  dioceses  had  now  to  be  provided  for  by  new  elec- 
tions and  consecrations.  Gobel,f  Bishop  of  Lydda,  was 
chosen  Metropolitan  of  Paris.  Expilly  and  Marolles, 
clerical  Deputies,  were  elected  to  provincial  dioceses, 
and  consecrated,  at  Paris,  by  Talleyrand.  Gregory, 
Claude  le  Coz,  Lamourette,  and  Moses,  were  elected  to 
other  principal  places.  On  the  whole,  the  Constitu- 
tional high  clergy  were  honorable  men,  though  of  only 
moderate  rank  and  talent.  The  most  eminent  of  them 
was  doubtless  Gregory,  whose  finn  character  was  proof 
against  both  the  bloody  orgies  of  demagogism,  and  the 
menaces  and  promises  of  despotism.  His  new  position 
accorded  perfectly  with  his  convictions.  He  was  thor- 
oughly attached  to  the  Revolution.  He  loved  it  with 
an  ardent  enthusiasm,  which,  though  sometimes  leading 
him  to  imprudent  language,  yet  never  induced  him  to 
a  culpable  act.  He  was  neither  a  profound  thinker  nor 
a  great  orator,  but  he  was  of  that  solid  practical  stuff, 
out  of  which  new  social  fabrics  are  most  readily  built. 
He  had  faith  and  heroism.  Lamourette  had  already  fig- 
ured as  a  feeble  apologist  of  religion  against  the  philos- 
ophers, and  was,  on  the  whole,  one  of  those  gentle  spirits 
which  make  no  mark  in  a  time  of  strife.  Claude  le  Coz 
honored  himself  by  a  noble  defense  of  the  non-juring 
•  See  Appendix,  note  15.  f  Ibid.,  note  16. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  125 

clergy,  and  by  his  devotion  to  the  person  of  the  King. 
Hie  defended  the  new  Constitution  of  the  Church  with 
all  the  earnestness  of  thorough  conviction.  As  to  Gobel, 
Bishop  of  Lydda,  he  was  one  of  those  shallow,  vacillating 
spirits  who  are  driven  hither  and  thither  by  the  popular 
current,  as  sea-weed  is  washed  by  the  waves.  At  bottom, 
he  had  grave  scruples  as  to  the  new  Constitution  of  the 
Church,  and  defended  it  but  feebly ;  and  yet  he  was  des- 
tined subsequently  to  dishonor  his  name  forever  by  the 
most  shameless  of  apostasies.  Of  the  former  Bishops 
who  had  not  abandoned  their  places,  two,  Jarente  of 
Orleans,  and  Savines  of  Viviers,  were  poor  and  obscure  ; 
and  two  were  talented  and  celebrated,  though  but  little 
esteemed,  namely,  Talleyrand,  (a  politician  rather  than 
a  Churchman,  who  was  soon  to  enter  the  ranks  of  the 
laity,  and  there  find  a  more  congenial  field  for  his  gifts,) 
and  Lomenie  de  Brienne,  who  had  been  equally  frivo- 
lous as  minister  and*  as  prelate.  The  Pope,  in  reply  to 
a  letter  from  the  latter,  had  charged  him  with  inflicting 
the  greatest  possible  dishonor  on  the  Roman  purple 
by  taking  the  civil  oath,  and  by  consecrating  new 
Bishops.  "  Such  acts,"  said  the  Holy  Father,  "  are  de- 
testable crimes."  Brienne  answered  by  resigning  his 
ofhee  of  Cardinal.  The  Pope  announced  its  acceptance 
in  a  secret  consistory  held  September  the  26th,  1791. 
After  enumerating  the  acknowledged  services  of  the 
Archbishop  of  Sens,  he  passed  in  review  his  censurable 
acts  and  hesitated  not  to  class  among  the  worst  of  them, 
that  which  he  had  done,  as  Minister  of  State,  in  assuring 
tolerance  for  Protestants.  He  reproached  him  for 
having  restored,  in  part,  the  fatal  Edict  of  Nantes. 


126        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 


The  Pope,  in  thus  apologizing  for  persecution  in  the 
same  breath  in  which  he  defended  the  liberties  of 
the  Church,  chose  the  surest  way  of  defeating  his  own 
cause.  Talleyrand  had  been  expressly  condemned  in 
the  brief  of  April  10th,  but  he  paid  little  attention 
thereto,  as  his  ambition  far  surpassed  the  ecclesiastical 
sphere.  The  elections  to  new  bishoprics  and  curacies 
were  not  made  in  all  places  with  equal  facility.  In  some 
parishes  the  balloting  had  to  be  repeated  seven  or  eight 
times.  The  most  absurd  and  ridiculous  rumors  were 
circulated.  It  was  pretended  that  at  the  moment  of  the 
election  of  Expilly  it  had  thundered  terribly,  and  that 
the  skies  were  covered  with  clouds  the  day  of  his  ar- 
rival at  Quimper. 

The  first  public  acts  of  the  new  clergy  were  not  of  a 
nature  to  make  a  favorable  impression.  A  new  Bishop, 
in  presenting  his  homage  at  the  bar  of  the  Assembly, 
pronounced  a  violent  discourse  against  the  refractory 
clergy,  intimating  that  their  fanaticism  might  resort  to 
torches  and  poniards.  He  closed  by  a  pompous  apology 
of  his  conduct  in  accepting  his  new  position,  and  ex- 
claimed, most  ridiculously  out  of  place,  "  Now,  Lord, 
lettest  thou  thy  servant  depart  in  peace."  Nothing 
could  be  more  flat  than  the  pastoral  letter  of  Gobel,  the 
Metropolitan  of  Paris.  It  was  written  in  the  weak  sen- 
timental style  of  the  day.  It  spoke  of  the  pure  and 
precise  divine  morality  which  disclaims  sectarian  quar- 
rels. "  Let  us  preach  to  our  flock,"  said  he,  "  that  after 
the  divine  law  there  is  nothing  more  sacred  than  ^he 
law  of  the  State,  and  that  to  disobey  the  latter  is  to  vio- 
late the  former."    Thus,  in  his  opinion,  all  that  is  given 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  127 

to  Cnesar  is  given  to  God;  there  is  neither  distinction 
nor  reserve.  France,  at  the  first  venture,  had  struck  on 
a  model  of  a  mere  clerical  functionary.  Gobel  surpassed 
himself  in  absurdity  in  the  speech  he  pronounced  on 
the  occasion  of  the  death  of  Mirabeau.  He  regrets 
bitterly  the  death  of  the  great  man  to  whom  he  owes 
the  privilege  of  exercising  canonically,  on  the  flowery 
banks  of  the  Seine1,  the  ministry  which  he  had  pre- 
viously exercised  drearily  and  without  glory,  amid  the 
eternal  snows  of  Switzerland;  for  it  was  the  pure  hand 
of  Mirabeau  that  had  placed  him  in  the  See  of  Paris. 
"Who  could  have  imagined,"  he  exclaimed,  "that  a  ven- 
erable Archbishop  would  be  proscribed  to  make  place 
for  Gobel !  What  a  striking  illustration  of  the  wonder- 
working ability  of  the  great  man  whom  we  mourn  to- 
day ! "  At  this  thought  the  sensibilities  of  the  Bishop 
knew  no  bounds.  H  We  must  have,"  said  he,  "  civic 
priests,  civic  bishops,  and  a  religion  entirely  civic." 
That  nothing  might  be  wanting  to  the  ridiculousness  of 
this  farce,  it  termi nates  with  a  eulogy  of  the  domestic 
virtues  of  Mirabeau,  whose  life  had  been  notorious  for 
excessive  debauchery.  He  was  proclaimed  the  father  of 
the  new  Church.  This  wonderful  piece  of  rhetoric  was 
signed  by  the  Bishop  and  his  secretary,  and  sent  into 
every  parish  in  the  kingdom.  One  may  easily  imagine 
the  impression  such  a  document  made  on  the  adherents 
of  the  ancient  clergy.  Some  months  later,  Gobel  pre- 
sided over  a  ridiculous  farce,  which  mingled  the  Carnival 
with  the  most  sacred  ceremonies  of  the  Church.  A  com- 
pany of  children,  to  whom  he  had  administered  the  first 
communion,  were  paraded  with  great  display  in  the 


128        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

streets  of  Paris.  At  the  Jacobin  Club  they  gave  a 
specimen  of  the  principles  they  had  been  taught.  "  You 
have  brought  clearly  to  the  light  of  day,"  said  their 
spokesman  to  the  Jacobins,  "  that  sublime  truth,  so  often 
repeated  by  Voltaire  in  vain,  under  the  reign  of  the 
despots,  that  the  virtue  of  man  does  not  arise  from  his 
belief."  It  is  clear  that  Gobel  did  not  have  to  advance 
much  further  in  order  to  inaugurate  the  worship  of 
reason.  These  interesting  neophytes  were  then  presented 
to  the  Assembly.  Their  spokesman  recited,  in  their 
name,  a  stupidly  pompous  speech,  laudatory  of  the 
Revolution,  and  demanded  finally  that  these  chil- 
dren of  religion  might  be  made  the  children  of  the 
country  by  the  adoption  of  the  National  Assembly; 
after  which  they  were  caused  to  recite  in  chorus  the  civic 
oath.  The  grave  Treilhard,  who  was  President  at  the 
time,  replied  in  the  same  style.  "Infancy,"  said  he, 
"  exists  no  longer  when  the  native  land  is  at  stake,  and  the 
ices  of  age  melt  away  and  assume  new  life  for  the  defense 
of  the  empire."  The  radicals  applauded,  and  demanded 
the  printing  of  these  rhetorical  masterpieces,  whereupon 
the  conservatives  burst  out  in  roars  of  ironical  laughter, 
viewing  the  whole  affair  as  a  simple  farce.  A  very 
stormy  debate  followed,  in  which  it  came  near  passing 
from  harsh  words  to  fisticuffs — a  fit  termination  of  this 
exhibition  of  the  young  communicants  of  Gobel.  Truly 
the  Constitutional  clergy  were  poorly  represented  at 
Paris,  the  center  of  light. 

The  popular  irritation  against  the  priests  who  had  not 
taken  the  oath  increased  from  day  to  day.  Ignoble  car- 
icatures exposed  them  to  the  contempt  of  the  masses. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  129 

The  solemnities  of  Holy  Week  presented  afresh  to  the 
conscience  of  every  Catholic  the  grave  questions  which 
were  rending  the  land.  Among  the  masses  there  were 
two  classes,  the  scoffers  and  the  devout.  At  the  begin 
ning  of  April  some  unsuppressed  convents  had  suffered 
shameful  violences,  on  the  pretense  that  refractory 
priests  had  there  been  allowed  to  administer  the  sacra- 
ments. Nuns  had  even  been  publicly  whipped.  To 
stop  these  hideous  and  disgraceful  scenes,  the  munici- 
pality had  been  compelled  to  publish  a  proclamation, 
promising  that  the  official  Churches  should  be  inter- 
dicted to  the  non-juring  clergy.  These  troubles  occa- 
sioned in  the  department  of  the  Seine  a  decree  declaring 
that  the  temples  not  regarded  as  necessary  for  the  Con- 
stitutional worship  might  be  sold  and  appropriated  to 
any  use  whatever.  It  was  also  expressly  stated,  that 
private  individuals  might  obtain  such  and  such  religious 
edifices  for  the  celebration  of  any  worship  whatever,  on 
condition  of  placing  on  the  main  door  an  inscription  in- 
dicating its  use,  and  distinguishing  it  from  the  national 
Churches.  It  was  required  that  this  inscription  be  ap- 
proved by  the  officers  of  the  department,  at  least  during 
the  year  1791.  Doubtless  it  was  feared  that  it  might 
contain  something  calculated  to  offend  the  populace 
and  incite  to  riot.  In  the  provinces  the  agitation  was 
not  less  intense.  The  days  appointed  for  taking 
the  oath  were  fearful  occasions.  The  magistrates  in 
scarf,  followed  by  an  armed  force,  repaired  to  the 
churches  at  the  hour  of  service,  and  demanded,  willing 
or  unwilling,  the  taking  of  the  civic  oath.  In  Cham- 
pagne a  priest  was  shot  dead  at  the  altar  at  the 

17 


130        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

moment  he  was  explaining  why  he  could  not  take  the 
oath  required. 

Already  most  of  the  high  clergy,  especially  the  Bish- 
ops, had  left  France.  From  their  foreign  retreats  they 
kept  up  communication  with  their  former  dioceses,  and 
contributed  greatly  to  foment  sedition.  As  to  the  King, 
it  availed  him  nothing  that  he  had  sanctioned  the  de- 
crees. The  Assembly  knew  well  that  he  was  conscien- 
tiously opposed  to  taking  the  sacraments  from  the  hands 
of  a  Constitutional  priest.  But  as  he  made  no  parade 
of  his  private  sentiments,  it  would  have  been  wise  to 
ignore  them,  though  it  would  have  been  inconsequent 
to  allow  him  a  private  chaplain  who  had  refused  the 
oath.  The  matter  caused  trouble.  A  popular  riot  had 
prevented  the  King  from  going  to  the  church  at  St. 
Cloud,  on  Easter,  to  take  the  sacrament.  It  had  been 
provoked  by  a  handbill  of  the  Cordelier  Club.  The 
placard,  after  mentioning  the  reports  that  the  King 
had  been  keeping  in  his  palace  refractory  priests  to  offi- 
ciate in  a  way  forbidden  by  the  laws  of  the  Assembly, 
"  denounced  to  the  representatives  of  the  nation,  this 
first  subject  of  the  laws  as  himself  a  violator  of  the 
law."  Previously  to  this  the  King  had  been  under  the 
necessity  of  repairing  to  the  Assemby  to  obtain  per- 
mission of  "  freely  going  and  coming."  "  It  is  astonish- 
ing," he  had  said,  "  that  after  having  given  liberty  to 
the  nation,  I  cannot  free  myself." 

In  accordance  with  a  municipal  decree,  that  certain 
churches  might  be  used  for  any  worship  whatever,  a  few 
citizens  had  hired  the  Church  of  the  Theatins  for  the  use 
of  non-juring  priests.    The  authorities  had  accepted  the 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  131 

following  inscription :  "  Edifice  dedicated  'to  religions 
services  by  a  private*  society.  Peace  and  liberty."  The 
people  of  Paris  had  here  a  fine  chance  of  showing  their 
love  of  true  liberty,  by  conceding  it  to  a  minority  whose 
principles  they  detested.  Unfortunately  the  madness  of 
the  press  and  the  intemperance  of  the  political  clubs 
wrought  too  fatally  on  the  popular  passions.  The  day 
appointed  for  the  first  worship  of  these  non-juring  Cath- 
olics a  menacing  and  insulting  paper  had  been  affixed 
to  the  door  of  the  church.  A  mob  assembled  in  the 
street,  determined  to  do  violence  to  whoever  attempted 
to  pass  the  threshold.  Thus  the  most  sacred  of  liberties 
was  violated  on  the  very  first  occasion.  It  was  a  direct 
outrage  on  the  glorious  frontispiece  of  the  Constitution, 
the  Declaration  of  Rights ;  which  amounted  to  nothing 
but  a  vain  and  dead  letter,  if  it  could  not  protect  a  mi- 
nority against  an  insensate  mob.  The  conduct  of 
Lafayette  in  these  circumstances  was  highly  honorable. 
He  had  seen  in  America  the  working  of  the  largest  re- 
ligious liberty,  and  had  hoped  for  France  the  same 
happy  system.  In  his  memoirs  he  says  :  "  The  proposed 
remedy  of  allowing  each  society  to  support  its  own 
temple  and  ministers,  as  is  done  in  the  United  States, 
was  rejected  on  every  hand."  Though  hostile  to  the 
high  clergy  party,  he  was  willing  enough  to  respect  their 
rights  and  conscience;  he  even  allowed  non-juring 
priests  to  open  a  chapel  in  his  own  palace.  When  the 
populace  prevented  the  King  from  going  to  the  Church 
at  St.  Cloud,  Lafayette  was  so  incensed  at  this  violation 
of  religious  liberty  as  to  tender  his  resignation.  And 
lie  withdrew  it,  only  on  the  assurance  that  no  similar 


132        Reliyion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror, 

outrage  would  be  committed.  He  espoused  with  enthusi- 
asm, the  cause  of  the  Theatine  non-jurors,  and  besought 
them  to  celebrate  their  worship  despite  the  populace. 
"  For  two  days,"  wrote  he  on  this  occasion,  "  I  have 
been  absorbed  in  discussions  and  arrangements  relative  to 
the  full  and  immediate  maintenance  of  religious  liberty. 
The  real  aristocrats  are  offended  at  our  shielding  religion 
against  their  hostility.  The  Ecclesiastical  Committee 
spoke  to  me  to-day  of  measures  to  be  taken  against  the 
non-conforming  Catholics.  I  told  them  that  the  Na- 
tional Guard  was  an  instrument  which  would  play  any 
tune  they  pleased,  provided  only  that  they  did  not 
change  the  key,  which  was  the  Declaration  of  Rights." 

These  matters  gave  rise  to  a  discussion  in  the  As- 
sembly which  turned,  on  the  whole,  in  favor  of  religious 
liberty ;  though  the  enjoyment  of  the  right  was  very  in- 
secure so  long  as  it  was  liable  to  be  infringed  by  the 
mob.  It  was  contended  by  some  that  the  refusal  to  take 
the  oath  had  the  effect  only  to  deprive  of  public  office  and 
salary,  but  not  to  hinder  the  non-jurors  from  officiating  in 
the  national  Churches.  Others  denied  this  inference.  The 
cause  of  the  non-juring  priests  of  the  Theatine  Church 
found  able  defenders  in  Talleyrand  and  Sieyes ;  Mirabeau 
was  no  longer  there.  "  It  is  time,"  said  Talleyrand,  "  that 
the  people  should  know  that  this  liberty  of  opinion  is 
not  a  vain  and  meaningless  part  of  the  Declaration  of 
] lights ;  that  it  is  a  real,  full,  and  entire  right,  to  which 
protection  is  due."  He  showed  that  it  was  entirely 
illusory  if  it  was  not  respected  outside  of  the  official 
worship,  and  if  it  was  not  so  far  respected  as  to  be  al- 
lowed the  right  of  manifesting  itself  in  acts  of  public 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Tewor.  133 

worship.  "  We  do  not  combat  fanaticism,"  said  he,  "  to 
substitute  in  its  place  a  culpable  indifference.  It  is  the 
respect  for  conscience  that  we  wish  to  consecrate.  We 
wish  to  insure  the  triumph  of  true  religion  by  leaving  to 
it  no  resort  but  persuasion,  and  by  showing  that  it  has 
nothing  to  fear  from  the  emulation  of  rivals."  After  ex- 
pressing lively  regrets  that  the  people  of  Paris  had  to 
such  an  extent  infringed  the  liberty  of  conscience,  he 
continued :  "  Conscience  must  be  respected,  even  in  our 
bitterest  adversaries.  Those  who  believe  it  must  be  al- 
lowed, if  they  wish  it,  to  stigmatize  us  as  schismatics. 
Their  worship,  whether  it  be  like  or  different  from  ours, 
must  be  perfectly  free,  otherwise  religious  liberty  is  only 
a  name,  and  we  become  an  intolerant  and  persecuting 
people.  Let  us  show  that  this  liberty  is  one  of  the 
great  benefits  of  our  Constitution,  which  will  grow 
stronger  from  day  to  day,  and  soon  or  late  command  the 
homage  of  mankind." 

The  Abbot  Sieyes  maintained  the  same  principles  with 
his  accustomed  directness  and  precision.  "  Citizens  have 
been  disturbed,"  said  he,  "in  their  reunion;  this  re- 
union had  a  religious  object.  Now  is  there  any  law 
forbidding  assemblies  of  the  people  when  they  have  a 
religious  object,  provided  that  otherwise  they  violate 
no  law?  I  know  of  no  such  law.  The  National  As- 
sembly has  substantially  said  to  all,  '  You  shall  not  be 
disturbed  for  your  religious  opinions ;  you  are  subject 
only  to  the  law.  Your  liberty  is  guaranteed  to  you ;  rely 
on  it,  it  shall  be  protected.'  If  any  one  objects,  saying 
that  opinion  is  free,  but  only  in  the  mind,  or  when  one 
is  alone,  or  in  a  small  company,  what  more  has  the  As- 


134        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

sembly  granted  than  existed  under  the  former  regime  f 
Is  it  possible  for  a  liberty  or  right  to  exist  in  principle, 
but  not  in  action  or  consequences  ?  When  you  say  the 
citizens  are  free,  what  can  you  mean  but  that  they  are 
free  to  put  their  rights  into  effect  ?  This  must  be  so, 
unless  liberty  is  a  mere  abstraction.  If  such  is  the 
liberty  meant,  it  is  not  worth  the  trouble  of  the  Revolu- 
tion." To  those  who  objected  that  religious  liberty  was 
full  of  peril,  because  it  gave  scope  to  popular  agitation, 
Sieyes  replied,  that  the  same  objection  might  be  urged 
against  every  kind  of  liberty.  The  simple  fact  was,  that 
the  majority  was  in  favor  of  universal  tolerance  so  long 
as  it  was  enjoyed  only  by  sects  to  which  they  were  in- 
different; but  as  soon  as  it  turned  to  the  profit  of  an 
enemy,  for  example,  the  non-juring  Catholics,  they  op- 
posed it. 

Lanjuinais,*  who  subsequently  distinguished  himself 
by  his  firm  defense  of  liberty  and  justice,  took  the 
question  this  time  by  its  small  side,  and  called  upon 
himself  a  sally  of  contemptuous  laughter  by  his  ill-timed 
railing  against  the  privileges  enjoyed  by  the  non-juring 
Catholics  and  the  Protestants.  The  result  of  the  debate 
was,  that  the  National  Assembly  pronounced  itself 
fully  in  favor  of  the  great  principles  advocated  in  the 
speeches  of  Talleyrand  and  Sieyes.  Thus  the  great 
principles  of  1789  were  interpreted  anew  by  this  sov- 
ereign Assembly,  as  consecrating  the  largest  religious 
liberty.  The  pretended  liberal  of  to-day,  who  does  not 
favor  entire  liberty  of  worship,  is  no  disciple  of  1789. 
Unfortunately  this  great  right,  together  with  all  others, 
*  See  Appendix,  note  17. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  135 

was  soon  destined  to  be  submerged  by  the  waves  of  the 
all-devouring  Revolution ;  nevertheless,  in  spite  of  its 
temporary  defeat,  it  still  remains,  like  a  rock  imbedded  in 
the  earth,  the  great  principle  which  is  to  form  the  corner- 
stone of  our  constitutional  edifice,  when  it  is  definitely 
built. 

It  is  easy  to  see  how  greatly  the  Assembly  was  in  ad- 
vance of  the  people  of  Paris  in  point  of  real  liberalism. 
Notwithstanding  the  fine  discussion  in  the  Assembly  on 
religious  liberty,  the  Church  of  the  Theatins  had  scarcely 
been  opened  when  the  non-juring  Catholics  were  driven 
away  by  a  mob,  and  their  altar  demolished.  Lafayette 
had  to  come  in  person  to  stop  the  riot,  and  Bailly,*  the 
astronomer,  wrote,  in  the  name  of  the  municipality  of 
Paris,  a  letter  of  thanks  to  the  National  Guard,  which 
had  lent  its  strong  hand  to  the  law.  He  here  pleaded  the 
cause  of  conscience,  and  deprecated  fanaticism,  whether 
under  the  banner  of  the  Revolution  or  of  religion.  But 
the  men  of  1789  were  fast  becoming  unable  to  control 
the  passions  of  the  populace,  on  which  they  had  already 
too  much  relied.  They  could  call  them  to  their  aid,  but 
they  could  not  place  a  limit  to  their  excesses.  More- 
over, they  were  not  free  from  passion  themselves,  and  it 
was  in  spite  of  themselves  if  they  respected  religious 
liberty  in  their  enemies  of  the  non-juring  clerical  party. 

The  opposition  of  this  party  grew  from  day  to  day, 
and  spread  like  wild-fire  over  the  whole  land.  The  calm 
North  was  affected  as  well  as  the  fanatical  South.  Riots 
broke  out  in  several  provinces.  The  Bishop  of  Senez 
courageously  resisted  all  commands  to  obey  a  law  which 
*  See  Appendix,  note  18. 


136        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 


violated  his  conscience,  and  took,  at  tbe  tribunal  of  Cas- 
tillon,  the  attitude  of  an  ancient  confessor.  His  firmness 
had  an  extrordinary  influence  on  the  clergy.  He  ob- 
tained the  recantation  of  a  priest  who  had  taken  the 
oath,  and  ceased  not  to  direct  his  shafts  against  the 
decrees  of  the  Assembly.  In  several  places  priests  had 
to  be  thrown  into  prison. 

About  this  time,  the  translation  of  the  ashes  of  Vol- 
taire (who  thirteen  years  previously  had  scarcely  been 
allowed  the  most  humble  burial  place  by  the  Catholics 
of  France)  to  the  Pantheon,  the  national  temple  of  the 
French,  had  given  new  offense.  It  had  been  accom- 
plished in  the  midst  of  theatrical  pomp  and  affected  sen- 
timentality. It  was  a  fresh  defiance  of  revolutionary 
France  to  the  prejudices  of  Catholicism.  One  of  the 
motives  given  by  the  Assembly  for  decreeing  these 
highest  honors  to  Voltaire  was,  that  he  had  prepared  the 
nation  for  liberty.  But  they  were  very  soon  to  see,  and 
literally  to  realize,  how  closely  irreligion  is  allied  to  des- 
potism As  yet,  however,  the  majority  of  the  Assembly 
showed  no  disposition  to  transgress  the  bounds  of  a  wise 
moderation.  An  instance  of  this  occurred  at  this  time, 
in  a  case  where  they  passed  lightly  over  a  serious  disre- 
spect of  the  laws,  committed  by  the  Archbishop  of 
Rouen.  Their  patience  was  further  tried  by  frequent 
briefs  of  the  Pope,  which  were  circulated  widely,  and 
which  created  much  mischief  in  the  land.  In  the  session 
of  June  9th,  1791,  Thouret  proposed  a  decree  forbidding 
in  the  future,  under  heavy  penalty,  the  circulation  of  any 
act  of  the  Papal  See  which  had  not  previously  been  ap- 
proved by  the  Assembly.    This  would  have  infringed  on 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  137 

the  liberty  of  the  press,  for  it  would  have  hindered,  in  one 
of  its  most  sacred  forms,  the  free  expression  of  thought  in 
a  large  class  of  citizens.  The  furthest  they  could  properly 
have  gone,  would  have  been  to  forbid  the  circulation  of 
Papal  acts  as  binding  in  France.  Malouet  and  other 
speakers  ably  exposed  the  injustice  of  such  a  law.  The 
decree,  as  finally  passed,  was  limited  in  its  application  to 
the  official  or  constitutional  clergy.  This  moderation  was 
imitated  by  some  of  the  provincial  authorities.  In  one 
locality,  the  Sisters  of  Charity  had  manifested  disappro- 
bation of  the  new  regime,  and  the  populace  had  menaced 
them.  The  authorities  took  up  their  defense ;  but  while 
allowing  them  the  liberty  of  still  taking  care  of  the 
sick,  they  forbade  them  the  right  of  teaching,  which 
was  now  a  civil  function.  The  Minister  of  the  Interior 
wrote  them  a  sensible  letter,  advising  them  to  concede 
to  the  sick,  whom  they  nursed,  the  same  liberty  they 
claimed  for  themselves. 

But  the  attempted,  flight  of  the  King,  June  21,  1791, 
rendered  moderate  measures  any  longer  impossible. 
The  revolutionary  passions  became  irresistible.  The 
emphasis  laid  by  the  King  on  the  violence  he  had  suf- 
fered from  the  Revolutionists  in  matters  of  conscience, 
was  a  noteworthy  feature  of  the  manifesto  which  he  had 
designed  to  explain  to  France  and  to  Europe  the  cause 
of  his  flight.  We  thus  read  these  words:  "On  his 
recovery  from  sickness  the  King  made  ready  to  go  to 
the  Church  at  St.  Cloud.  As  a  pretext  for  arresting 
him,  advantage  was  taken  of  the  respect  which  he  was 
known  to  entertain  for  the  religion  of  his  fathers. 
Thereafter  he  was  compelled  to  order  the  discharge  of 


138        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

his  private  chaplain,  to  approve  the  letter  of  the  [revolu- 
tionary] ministry  to  the  foreign  powers,  and  to  attend 
the  celebration  of  mass  by  the  new  Curate  of  St.  Ger- 
main l'Auxerrois."  This  document  set  in  the  plainest 
light  the  intimate  alliance  between  the  counter-revolu- 
tion and  the  non-juring  clergy.  It  is  not  surprising 
that  the  opposition  of  the  clergy  henceforth  excited 
more  •  discontent  and  displeasure.  The  fugitive  King 
had  openly  espoused  their  cause  in  the  eyes  of  all  Eu- 
rope. On  the  fourth  of  August  an  obscure  Deputy  had 
gone  so  far  as  to  propose,  in  the  interest  of  the  public 
safety,  the  suspension  of  the  laws  of  justice  and  liberty, 
in  order  to  crush  the  opposition  of  the  refractory  clergy. 
He  had  dared  to  propose,  in  the  midst  of  the  great  As- 
sembly which  had  voted  the  Rights  of  Man,  that  all  the 
non-juring  priests  of  certain  departments  in  which  great 
trouble  then  existed,  be  required  to  retire  to  a  distance 
of  thirty  leagues,  on  pain  of  imprisonment.  This  would 
have  been  to  inaugurate  general  proscription,  for  which 
the  moment  had  not  yet  arrived.  The  men  of  1789 
could  not  be  led  to  so  flat  a  contradiction  of  their  own 
principles,  even  under  the  pressure  of  their  own  passions 
and  the  raging  fury  of  the  masses.  This  proposition 
was  destined  to  reappear  under  an  aggravated  form  in 
the  next  Assembly.  On  the  last  day  of  September, 
1791,  the  Constituent  Assembly  handed  over  its  powers 
to  that  stormy  Legislative  Assembly  which  accom- 
plished the  sad  work  of  sweeping  away  the  monarchy 
and  establishing  the  republic  on  the  ruins  of  liberty. 

Let  us  not  be  unjust  toward  this  great  Assembly, 
which,  in  the  midst  of  a  society  full  of  abuses  and  preju- 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  139 

dices,  had  the  hard  task  of  laying  the  foundation  of  a 
new  order  of  things.  Assailed  by  difficulties  on  every 
hand,  a  prey  to  contrary  and  mutually-exasperating 
passions,  having  to  deal  with  a  royalty  which  it  could 
not  trust,  urged  on  by  an  uncultured  people  who  were 
tired  of  their  yoke  and  impatient  to  humble  those  who 
had  so  long  held  them  in  the  dust,  it  was  compelled  to 
deal  at  once  with  all  sorts  of  questions,  and  to  resolve 
them  under  the  pressure  of  the  most  urgent  necessity, 
and  amid  the  heat  of  the  most  ardent  party  strife.  It 
was  not  possible,  in  such  circumstances,  to  erect  a  dura- 
ble edifice,  for  too  often  laws  were  made  as  one  erects 
batteries — against  the  enemies  of  the  day.  The  true 
constitutionalists,  who  desired  to  preserve  both  liberty 
and  power,  and  to  conciliate  the  future  with  the  past, 
had  no  chance  of  success  in  so  violent  a  crisis.  Mira- 
beau,  who  was  really  on  their  side,  saw  fit  to  render 
palatable  his.  reasonable  and  sober  discourses  by  the 
excesses  of  the  deina^osnie.  It  must  also  be  confessed 
that  the  stubbornness  and  plots  of  the  reactionary  party 
rendered  the  practice  of  wisdom  very  difficult.  In 
these  circumstances  the  svstem  of  Rousseau  had  fine 
scope  for  its  daring  theories,  its.  democratic  parade, 
(which,  nevertheless,  admitted  of  the  most  arbitrary 
measures,)  and  its  marked  tendency  to  sacrifice  liberty 
to  equality.  Although  restrained  by  the  English  school 
and  the  great  talents  of  its  opponents,  still  this  system 
contributed  largely  to  drive  the  Revolution  into  ex- 
tremes, and  to  deprive  the  governmental  machine  of 
that  counterpoise,  without  which  it  is  unable  to  resist 
the  assaults  of  passion.    The  system  of  Rousseau,  in 


140        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

league  with  Gallican  Jansenism,  led  the  Assembly  to 
its  greatest  errors  in  ecclesiastical  matters.  Under  this 
influence  the  Constituent  Assembly  committed  the  mis- 
take of  salarying  the  Churches  from  the  State  treasury, 
and  organizing  a  functionary  clergy.  It  sought  to  sub- 
ordinate this  clergy  to  the  government  by  means  of  the 
civil  constitution  and  the  political  oath  ;  it  carried  con- 
straint even  into  the  conscience.  Thus  in  the  very 
temple  of  liberty  the  old  idol  of  the  State  had  been 
replaced  on  the  altar  by  legislators  who,  while  believing 
themselves  bold  innovators,  were  in  this  matter  mere 
revivers  of  the  most  obsolete  pretensions  of  the  ancient 
monarchy.  They  had,  however,  proclaimed  liberty  of 
conscience  outside  of  the  official  worship ;  but  this  the 
people  would  not  peaceably  suffer,  and  its  shadow  even 
was  destined  to  disappear  in  the  storm  which  was  al- 
ready muttering  in  the  distance,  and  which  was  in  the 
sequel  to  overturn  both  Throne  and  Altar.  Neverthe- 
less great  rights  had  been  invoked.  A  noble  enthu- 
siasm, though  doubtless  mingled  with  imprudent  indig- 
nation, had  animated  this  great  Assembly.  And  it  is 
upon  the  doctrines  which  it  proclaimed  that  all  devel- 
opment of  liberty  in  this  country  must  ever  be  based ; 
for,  though  it  unfortunately  compromised  every-thing, 
yet  it  divined  and  aspired  after  every-thing,  and  noth- 
ing can  ever  surpass  the  intense  patriotic  ardor  which 
consumed  it.  A  terrible  ordeal  was  soon  to  separate 
the  good  grain  from  the  chaff.  The  struggles  whicli 
ensued  were  to  be  the  implacable  proof  of  the  errors  it 
had  committed  as  to  the  proper  relations  of  the  tem- 
poral to  the  spiritual  power. 


BOOK  SECOND. 


THE  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLY  AND  THE  NATIONAL 
CONVENTION  UNTIL  THE  PROCLAMATION  OF  THE 
SEPARATION  OF  CHURCH  AND  STATE. 


CHAPTER  I 

RELIGIOUS  STRUGGLE  IN  THE  LEGISLATIVE  ASSEMBLY. 

The  Constituent  Assembly  had  maintained  till  the  last 
the  principle  of  the  liberty  of  conscience  ;  but  the  Dec- 
laration of  Rights  was  a  bond  far  too  frail  to  restrain  a 
land  agitated  by  bitter  religious  strife.  What  could  an 
abstract  idea  avail  against  popular  passion  !  Let  us 
also  forget  not,  that  though  the  Assembly  had  remained 
true  to  the  liberal  idea,  yet  it  had  but  too  often  yielded 
to  the  pernicious  pressure  of  the  populace.  Still  the 
men  of  1789  could  not  be  so  inconsequent  as  to  suspend 
the  freedom  of  worship.  In  the  Legislative  Assembly, 
where  they  formed  only  an  insignificant  minority,  they 
pleaded  earnestly  in  its  defense  ;  but  their  resistance  was 
neither  long  nor  very  efficacious.  The  fatal  theory  of 
the  public  safety,  much  more  pernicious  in  a  republic 
than  in  an  absolute  monarchy,  annulled  for  a  time  the 
most  precious  conquests  of  the  Revolution.  Violent 
hands  were  already  preparing  to  disfigure  the  statue  of 
Liberty,  though  it  had  but  just  been  placed  on  its 


142        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

pedestal.  The  rude  insolence  which  the  new  Assembly 
showed  to  the  King  from  its  very  first  sittings  was  a 
violation  of  the  spirit  of  the  Constitution  ;  for  to  debase 
a  royalty  already  so  dependent  was  really  to  destroy  it. 
This  open  disrespect  was  to  inflict  on  it  a  sort  of  moral 
death.  The  Constitution  was  also  in  other  respects 
little  better  regarded.  In  fact,  the  work  of  the  Legisla- 
tive Assembly  was  less  to  govern  and  found  than  to 
combat  and  destroy.  Composed  mostly  of  new  and 
very  young  men,  chiefly  signalized  by  their  revolution- 
ary fervor,  and  whose  official  duties  had  brought  them 
in  contact  with  the  reactionary  spirit  in  the  provinces, 
it  was  imbued  with  a  feeling  of  distrust  and  defiance. 
Every  thing  impressed  on  it  the  great  duty,  as  it 
thought,  of  crushing  every  obstacle  to  the  Revolution, 
and  more  especially  the  religious  reaction,  which  was 
now  assuming  alarming  proportions  throughout  the 
land.  Driven  by  its  own  inclination  in  the  direction  of 
the  arbitrary,  and  not  having,  as  aids  in  checking  its 
excesses,  the  great  orators  and  politicians  whom  an  un- 
wise measure  of  the  first  had  shut  out  from  this  second 
Assembly,  there  was  little  to  hinder  it  from  rushing  to 
its  own  destruction.  The  conservative  members  of  the 
first  had  no  representation  in  the  second,  and  the  mod- 
erates of  the  new  Assembly  corresponded  to  the  radicals 
of  the  old.  The  middle  party  of  the  Legislative  As- 
sembly, without  courage  or  fixed  principles,  were  ever 
ready  to  throw  their  weight  on  the  side  of  the  strongest 
and  most  violent.  Trembling  and  hesitating  royalty 
passed,  for  a  moment,  from  the  concessions  which  had 
been  wrested  from  its  weakness,  to  a  show  of  resistance 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 


143 


which  served  only  the  cause  of  its  enemies,  and  endured 
only  sufficiently  long  for  the  current  to  gain  head 
enough  to  sweep  it  away  entirely.    An  insensate  press, 
which  could  attack  private  or  public  character  wTith 
impunity — an  organized  mob  constantly  collected  in  and 
about  the  hall  of  the  Assembly — the  increasing  violence 
of  the  debates  in  the  clubs— the  intoxication  of  combat 
— the  constant  suspicion  of  treason  on  the  one  hand  and 
of  conspiracy  on  the  other— what  was  lacking  to  produce 
on  the  Assembly  a  most  unfortunate  and  irresistible 
pressure  ?    The  radicals  of  the  Legislative  Assembly, 
as  is  well  known,  were  the  brilliant  group  of  Girondist  * 
Deputies.    Behind  them  stood,  as  their  natural  heirs, 
the  future  extremists  of  the  Mountain  party,  now  only 
distinguished  from  them  by  a  ruder  energy  and  a  more 
cruel  disposition.     We  will  see  that  the  Girondists 
showed  in  the  religious  struggles  as  much  violence  and 
injustice  as  their  enemies,  and  that  if  they  did  not  erect 
the  political  scaffold,  they  at  least  laid  its  foundation  by 
measures  of  illiberal  proscription.    They  sacrificed  right 
and  liberty  to  "reasons  of  State;"  and  this  is  the 
(—.•lice  of  the  political  catechism  of  the  terrorists. 
Their  eloquence,  their  youth,  their  generosity,  and  espe- 
cially their  courageous  death,  tend  to  blind  us  as  to 
their  faults.    But  we  must  not  look  at  them  simply  in 
this  last  hour;  for  that  liberty  which  they  then  proudly 
and  heroically  invoked,  they  themselves  had  too  often 
violated  in  their  own  political  career.    They  had  tried 
to  found  liberty  by  the  arbitrary,  a  sure  way  of  destroy- 
ing both  it  and  themselves.    They  left  it  bleeding  in 
*  See  Appendix,  note  19. 


144        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

the  hands  of  barbarous  men  who  stained  its  name  with 
the  stigma  of  their  own  dishonor.  Docile  and  passion- 
ate disciples  of  an  unbelieving  age,  the  Girondists  dis- 
played in  their  opposition  to  the  reactionary  clergy  all 
the  prejudices  of  a  materialistic  philosophy  which  was 
incapable  of  respecting  God  as  manifested  in  the  human 
conscience.  They  gave  to  the  world  the  shameful  spec- 
tacle of  persecuting  disciples  of  Voltaire.  Let  us,  how- 
ever, in  judging  them,  not  forget  how  much  there  is  to 
be-  pleaded  in  their  excuse ;  for  to  their  eyes  religion  was 
identified  with  politics,  and  behind  the  crowd  of  suffer- 
ing confessors,  who  have  all  our  admiration,  was  to  be 
seen  the  long  line  of  political  reactionists,  who  made 
use  of  every  thing,  even  to  religion  and  martyrdom,  for 
their  pernicious  purposes. 

Let  us  take  a  brief  glance  at  the  situation  of  the 
country  at  the  opening  of  the  debates  of  the  Legislative 
Assembly.  The  matter  of  the  oath,  and  the  displacement 
of  the  non-juring  priests,  gave  continual  trouble.  Where 
the  revolutionary  party  was  the  stronger,  the  refractory 
clergy  suffered  all  manner  of  ill  treatment.  Where  the 
contrary  was  the  case,  the  new  clergy  often  suffered  per- 
sonal violence  from  the  populace.  The  non-juring  clergy, 
though  deposed  from  their  official  stations,  yet  enjoyed 
their  salaries  as  private  ecclesiastics,  and  could  as  such 
celebrate  the  rites  of  the  Church  in  the  official  temples. 
They  also  had  the  right  of  renting,  under  certain  con- 
ditions, private  halls  for  their  own  worship.  But  in  this 
right  they  were  constantly  frustrated  by  the  outrages 
of  the  mob,  and  by  the  unfairness  of  the  local  police, 
who  often  held  them  responsible  for  riots  of  which  they 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 


145 


had  only  been  the  victims.  Though  in  many  rural  dis- 
tricts they  preserved  their  ancient  ascendency,  yet  in  the 
cities  they  were  generally  at  the  mercy  of  the  populace. 
At  Paris  the  opposition  against  them  was  surprisingly 
great.  Lafayette,  in  resigning  the  command  of  the  Na- 
tional Guards,  recommended  earnestly  respect  for  relig- 
ious liberty.  "  Liberty,"  said  he,  "  will  not  be  firmly 
established  among-  us  so  long;  as  intolerance  of  religions 

00  to 

opinions,  under  pretext  of  I  know  not  what  kind  of 
patriotism,  shall  presume  to  admit  the  thought  of  a 
dominant  and  a  proscribed  worship."  The  authorities 
published  a  severe  proclamation,  on  the  occasion  of  the 
assault  on  the  Irish*  College  to  prevent  the  non-juring 
w«  trahip.  It  was  declared  that  the  assault  had  been  a  vio- 
la t  ion  both  of  religious  liberty  and  of  the  rights  of  hospi- 
tality. The  local  authorities  of  Paris  were  recommended 
to  safeguard,  in  the  future,  the  fullest  religious  liberty. 
But  they  were  strongly  disposed  to  do  the  very  opposite. 
New  violence  followed.  At  the  Irish  College  women 
had  been  assaulted  on  leaving  the  church.  At  the  Irish 
Seminary  a  female  had  been  brutally  torn  from  the  con- 
fessional. The  house  of  English  nuns,  at  the  Jar  din  des 
J'lu/ites,  had  been  the  theater  of  similar  scenes.  The 
police  had  intervened  only  to  gratify  the  mob  by  shut- 
ting up  the  churches  attacked.  A  magistrate  to  whom 
complaint  was  made,  satisfied  himself  with  remarking 
that  the  people  were  not  ripe. 

On  occasion  of  these  persecutions  the  non-juring 
Catholics  of  Paris  sent  a  remonstrance  to  the  King. 
"  Sire,"  said  they,  "  the  Catholics  of  Paris  for  more  than 

Fix  months  have  been  exiled  from  their  temples,  deprived 

10 


146         Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

of  their  worship,  and  exposed  to  all  the  outrages  of  fa- 
naticism, without  uttering  a  single  complaint.  Disciples 
of  a  Master  who,  while  dying  on  the  cross,  prayed  even 
for  his  executioners — children  of  a  religion  whose  first 
law  is  charity,  and  whose  first  benefit  is  peace — they 
thought  fit  at  first  to  stifle  their  complaints  and  hide 
their  sorrow  in  their  own  bosoms ;  but  now,  taking  cour- 
age from  the  promulgation  of  the  constitutional  laws, 
we  have  presumed  to  speak  to  you  of  our  rights  to  the 
common  liberty,  and  to  ask,  for  the  exercise  of  our 
worship,  the  protection  of  the  laws.  All  we  desire  is 
peace ;  the  Constitution  gives  us  rights  ;  it  is  time  that 
we  enjoy  them." 

In  the  provinces  the  attitude  of  the  old  clergy  was 
more  bold,  for  they  were  in  general  better  sustained  by 
the  populace.  Messrs.  Gallois  and  Gensonne  had  been 
sent,  in  July  1791,  by  the  Assembly,  into  the  west  of 
France.  They  found  the  people  of  La  Vendee,  where 
such  a  terrible  civil  war  soon  broke  out,  very  favorably 
disposed  to  the  new  regime  in  every  thing  that  did  not 
concern  their  religion.  "  These  people,"  said  they,  "  re- 
mote from  the  common  center  of  resistance,  disposed  nat- 
urally to  a  love  of  peace,  of  order,  and  of  law,  were  en- 
joying the  benefits  of  the  Revolution  without  experi- 
encing its  storms.  Nothing  would  have  been  more  easy 
than  to  attach  them  to  the  Constitution,  if  their  religious 
faith,  which  is  very  positive  and  lively,  had  only  been 
respected.  Their  religion  has  become  very  strong,  and, 
as  it  were,  the  one  moral  habit  of  their  existence."  Not 
being  able  to  distinguish  between  religion  and  the  priest, 
they  thought  themselves  deprived  of  their  faith  when 


Religi  n  and  fh\  Reign  of  Terror.  147 


they  saw  the  priests  turned  out  of  office  whom  they  re- 
garded as  the  sole  mediators  between  Heaven  and  earth. 
They  clung  to  them  with  a  sort  of  wild  affection  which 
could  easily  be  brought  to  believe  insurrection  a  sacred 
duty.  And  the  non-juring  priests  were  not  backward 
in  taking  advantage  of  this  disposition.  The  refractory 
Bishop  of  Lucon  multiplied  his  pastoral  letters,  to  keep 
his  flock  true  to  the  old  faith.  He  forbade  his  clenry  to 
enter  the  churches  profaned  by  the  new  priests,  and 
counseled  them  to  open  new  places  for  worship.  **In 
parishes,"  said  he,  u  where  there  are  few  who  are  rich, 
it  will  doubtless  be  difficult  to  find  a  suitable  locality, 
and  to  procure  sacred  vessels  and  ornaments.  In  such 
cased  a  mere  bam,  a  portable  altar,  a  surplice  of  calico, 
and  vessels  of  tin,  will  suffice  to  celebrate  the  sacred 
mysteries.  This  simplicity  and  poverty,  by  reminding 
us  of  the  firs:  ft£M  of  the  Church  and  of  the  cradle  of 
our  holy  religion,  will  be  a  powerful  means  of  exciting 
the  zeal  of  the  prie-ts  and  the  fervor  of  the  faithful. 
The  first  Christians  had  no  other  temples  than  their 
own  houses."'  The  Bishop  ordered  that  secret  regis- 
ters of  baptisms,  marriages,  and  interments  should  be 
kept,  and  that  if  any  one  could  not  avoid  entering  a 
cemetery  of  which  a  government  priest  had  the  charge, 
at  least  he  should  retire  with  all  possible  haste  as  soon 
as  the  oftensive  Curate  had  defiled,  with  his  presence,  the 
holy  ground.  Zealous  missionaries,  going  out  from  a 
central  point,  fanned  the  flame  of  fidelity  to  the  old 
Church,  and  spread  abroad  popular  catechisms  which 
denounced  the  most  terrible  vengeance  of  Heaven  on 
whoever  had  any  thing  to  do  with  the  heretical  priests. 


148        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

No  marriage  celebrated  by  them  would  be  legal,  and 
every  ceremony  in  which  they  should  officiate  would  be 
a  sacrilege.  These  teachings  bore  their  harvest.  Fam- 
ilies were  divided,  and  municipal  boards  torn  with  dis- 
cord. The  substitution  of  the  new  for  the  old  clergy 
was  very  slow  and  very  incomplete.  Wherever  it  was 
accomplished  great  discord  resulted.  The  adherents  of 
the  refractory  clergy  could  not  behold  without  indigna- 
tion, the  venerable  Church  of  their  fathers  delivered  over 
to  a  small  and,  in  their  eyes,  infamous  minority,  while 
they  were  often  condemned  to  make  journeys  of  many 
miles  to  celebrate  their  worship.  On  Sundays  and  fes- 
tivals whole  villages  went  on  these  long  journeys.  It  is 
easy  to  imagine  with  what  feelings  of  bitterness  the 
fatigued  peasants  returned  to  their  homes  at  night.  The 
agitation  of  the  land  was  so  great  that  the  Assembly 
had  judged  well  to  back  their  exhortations  as  to  the  ex- 
cellence of  the  new  Church  system,  by  stationing  in  the 
most  refractory  quarters  detachments  of  troops.  But  the 
best  of  soldiers,  even  under  the  command  of  Dumouriez, 
could  not  re-establish  tranquillity.  What  was  needed 
was  not  soldiers,  but  liberty.  The  Commissioners,  finding 
the  district  of  Chatillon  all  on  fire,  assembled  the  people 
in  all  the  chief  places,  and  were  astonished  at  the  mod- 
eration of  a  population  which  had  been  denounced  as 
rebellious.  They  demanded  simply  that  the  government 
should  leave  to  them  the  Pastors  of  their  choice.  The 
report  of  the  Commissioners  says  :  "  The  people  desired 
to  enjoy  liberty  of  religious  opinion.  We  received  from 
numerous  deputations  this  same  prayer.  1  We  only  de- 
sire,' said  they,  '  to  have  priests  in  whom  we  have  confi- 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror,  149 

dence.'  Many  of  them  desired  this  so  much  that  they 
assured  us  they  would  freely  pay  for  the  favor  the  double 
of  their  assessment.  They  left  us  with  peace  and  con- 
tentment when  we  assured  them  that  it  was  a  principle 
of  the  Constitution  to  respect  the  liberty  of  conscience." 
These  words  of  a  chief  of  the  Girondists  contain  the  se- 
verest condemnation  of  all  the  innovations  of  the  Rev- 
olution in  ecclesiastical  matters.  They  prove  that  civil 
war  might  have  been  prevented  by  a  faithful  adherence 
to  the  Constitution.  What  a  condemnation  for  all  the 
so-called  measures  of  public  safety !  If  they  violate 
right,  they  cannot  contribute  either  to  safety  or  honor. 

While  La  Vendee  was  preparing  for  revolt,  like 
causes  produced  the  same  effects  in  other  places.  At 
Montpellier  the  mob  had  interrupted  the  mass  of  a  non- 
juring  priest,  in  a  church  which  had  been  officially  as- 
signed to  both  forms  of  worship.  The  Catholics  had 
repulsed  this  attack  by  the  cry  of  "Liberty  of  worship," 
which  was  in  fact  to  appeal  from  the  Revolution  mad 
to  the  Revolution  liberal  and  wise — to  that  one  which 
bad  eloquently  proclaimed  universal  tolerance.  Unfor- 
tunately, while  the  Catholics  were  sincere  in  their  de- 
fense of  this  great  principle,  and  were  sustained  by  a 
good  number  of  priests  who,  for  the  sake  of  their  flocks, 
courageously  exposed  themselves  to  many  dangers,  the 
chiefs  of  the  Royalist  party  abroad  sought  to  turn  this 
feeling  to  their  own  political  profit.  Their  sole  aim  was 
to  restore  the  ancient  regime,  with  all  its  abuses.  This 
is  clearly  evident  from  a  document  which  Abbot  Maury 
about  this  time  sent  to  the  Pope.  It  reveals  the  secret 
designs  of  the  leaders  of  the  Catholic  party  at  a  time 


150        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror^ 

when  multitudes  of  the  simple  and  pious,  unacquaint- 
ed with  the  thoughts  of  their  chiefs,  were  winning  for 
themselves  so  pure  a  glory  by  suffering  and  dying 
for  the  liberty  of  conscience.  This  liberty  is  cynically 
denied  in  the  letter  of  the  incorrigible  Abbot.  Instead 
thereof,  he  openly  pleads  for  a  restoration  of  the  old 
system,  with  all  its  abuses,  and  especially  for  the  main- 
tenance of  the  revocation  of  the  Edict  of  Nantes.  He 
declares  that  Louis  XIV.  justly  regarded  the  French 
nation  as  so  a  unit  that  it  could  not  admit  of  more  than 
one  religion ;  in  this  respect  the  nationality  was  some- 
what like  the  nature  of  the  Supreme  Being — as  soon  as 
a  division  is  admitted  he  ceases  to  exist.  He  argues 
that  the  share  the  Protestants  were  taking  in  the  French 
Revolution  justified  the  policy  of  the  revocation  of  the 
Edict  of  Nantes,  and  that  the  only  safe  course  was  to 
return  to  the  examples  of  Louis  XIV.,  and  trample 
under  foot  the  teachings  of  a  vain  philosophy.  He 
pleads  for  refusing  civil  rights  to  the  Protestants,  and 
for  denying  them  the  protection  of  the  laws.  This  ad- 
mirable plan  was  to  be  backed  by  a  Papal  bull  of  ex- 
communication against  the  Jansenists  and  philosophers ; 
and  the  people  were  thus  to  be  brought  back  to  sound 
reason,  and  to  the  yoke  which  for  a  moment  they  had 
shaken  off. 

Such  was  the  programme  of  the  counter-revolution. 
Surely  it  was  fully  as  absurd  and  foolish  as  that  of  its 
foes,  the  extreme  revolutionists.  The  suggestions  of 
Maury  were  well  received  at  Rome.  The  Pope,  not  con- 
tent with  pleading  for  the  sacred  rights  of  religion,  put 
himself  at  the  head  of  the  political  reaction  in  Europe, 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  151 

and  proclaimed  himself  the  champion  of  the  ancient  re- 
gime. Already  he  had  hurled  his  anathemas  against  the 
elementary  principles  of  modem  society.  Unfortunately, 
he  was  now  surrounded  by  a  cabinet  of  Absolutist  coun- 
selors, who  persisted  in  involving  and  confounding  the 
most  sacred  with  the  most  detestable  of  causes.  Under 
their  influence,  he  gave  much  more  attention  to  the 
temporalities  of  the  Church  than  to  the  interests  of  re- 
ligion. Instead  of  being  simply  the  father  of  the  faithful 
and  the  defender  of  Christianity,  he  played  the  earthly 
sovereign,  and  espoused,  against  the  people,  the  cause  of 
his  brethren  the  kings.  The  causes  of  despotism  and  of 
religion  being  thus  identified,  the  Revolutionists  believed 
themselves  justified  in  all  their  extreme  measures  against 
the  refractory  Catholics,  seeing  in  them  only  the  cham- 
pions of  the  despotism  against  which  ^they  were  strug- 
gling— a  view  which  was  true,  however,  only  of  a  portion 
of  them.  Moreover,  it  is  never  safe  nor  politic  to  imi- 
tate the  faults  of  one's  foes.  To  understand  the  action 
of  the  Legislative  Assembly,  it  was  necessary  for  us 
thus  to  present  clearly  the  complicated  state  of  the  re- 
ligious question.  Neither  party  was  in  the  right  purely 
and  simply,  and  each  pleaded  in  self-justification  the 
excesses  of  the  other.  The  sole  sublime  characters  in 
these  deplorable  struggles  were  the  humble  martyrs, 
whether  priests  or  peasants,  who,  strangers  to  all  polit- 
ical intrigues,  suffered  and  died  simply  for  their  faith. 

The  Legislative  Assembly  had  scarcely  begun  its 
labors  when  it  heard  of  the  massacres  at  Avignon. 
AYe  have  stated  already  how  this  little  Papal  territory 
had  been  reunited  to  France ;  but  a  decree  of  the  As- 


152        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

sembly  could  not  cool  the  rage  of  the  over-excited  pas- 
sions of  this  southern  city.  As  the  result  of  a  violent 
contest  of  the  two  rival  parties,  an  officer  of  the  govern- 
mental army  had  been  killed  in  the  church  of  the  Cor- 
deliers. The  people,  furious  at  this,  had  thrown  into 
prison  more  than  two  hundred  persons,  men  and 
women,  who  were  suspected  of  disliking  the  new  re- 
gime. Crowded  into  a  dark  recess  of  the  ancient  Papal 
palace,  they  had  been  massacred  on  the  sixth  of  October, 
1791,  by  a  band  of  brigands,  at  the  head  of  which  fig- 
ured a  man  well  known  for  his  cruelty,  the  revolutionist 
Jourdan,  afterward  known  as  the  Beheader.  This  act 
was  accomplished  with  an  unheard  of  barbarity,  and  the 
blood-stained  walls  remained  for  a  long  time  its  speak- 
ing witness.  The  indignation  of  the  Assembly  at  the 
news  of  these  cfmies  was  intense.  The  feelings  of  the 
Deputy  who  read  the  report  overcame  him  before  he 
could  finish  the  horrible  recital.  Xothing  was  more 
earnestly  insisted  on  than  the  punishment  of  these  in- 
augurators  of  terror.  However,  the  Girondists  at- 
tempted to  save  them,  and,  thanks  to  a  miserable  legal 
technicality,  succeeded  in  it  to  their  own  shame.  Yer- 
gniaud  was  guilty  of  lending  to  this  execrable  cause  the 
charm  of  his  grand  eloquence.  He  was  indignant  only 
against  the  victims  of  the  massacre.  "  Let  not  hang- 
men," said  he,  "  be  the  first  gift  you  make  to  the  people 
of  Avignon."  He  forgot  that  there  is  something  worse 
than  to  execute  great  criminals,  namely,  to  sharpen  the 
daggers  of  assassins  by  a  scandalous  impunity.  It  was 
an  encouragement  to  crime,  anfl  the  precursor  of  the 
horrors  of  the  coming  September. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 


153 


This  result  gave  the  measure  of  justice  that  might  be 
expected  from  the  Legislative  Assembly  by  the  perse- 
cuted adherents  of  the  ancient  Church.  The  whole 
tendency  was  toward  the  arbitrary  and  the  tyrannical 
Once  in  awhile,  however,  the  real  cause  of  the  trouble, 
and  the  true  solution  of  the  difficulties,  were  clearly 
caught  sight  of  by  the  better  members  of  the  Assembly. 
It  was  seen  and  felt  that  in  establishing  a  civil  religion 
the  first  Assembly  had  committed  a  grave  error.  This 
opinion  was  clearly  and  boldly  expressed  in  the  Moni- 
teur  by  an  illustrious  poet,  Andre  Chenier,  who  was  at 
that  time  the  honor  of  French  letters,  and  subsequently 
one  of  the  noblest  martyrs  of  liberty.  With  the  intui- 
tion of  genius  he  saw  at  once  the  cause  of  the  tyranny 
on  the  one  side  and  of  the  revolt  on  the  other.  This 
cause  was  the  meddling  of  the  government  in  matters 
of  religion.  Chenier  was  not  a  Christian  ;  he  thought 
and  wrote  as  a  philosopher;  and  yet  we  find  in  him 
much  more  respect  for  the  rights  of  conscience  than  in 
IhoM  reactionary  Catholics  who  wished  nothing  so 
much  as  to  go  back  to  the  old  regime,  under  which  they 
themselves  had  treated  their  opponents  with  the  same 
hard  fate  against  which  they  now  so  loudly  complained. 
k*  We  will  only  be  delivered,"  said  he,  "  from  the  influ- 
ence of  insurgent  priests  when  the  National  Assembly 
shall  assure  to  every  one  the  full  liberty  of  following 
and  inventing  whatever  religion  he  may  choose;  when 
every  one  shall  pay  for  the  worship  he  prefers,  and  for 
no  other;  and  when  the  courts  shall  punish  with  severity 
the  seditious  and  persecutors  of  every  party.  If  the 
Assembly  objects  that  the  French  people  are  not  ripe 


1 54        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror, 

for  such  doctrines,  then  we  say,  it  is  for  them,  by  means 
of  their  example,  their  discourses,  and  their  laws,  to 
prepare  and  ripen  us  for  them.  Priests  do  not  trouble 
those  states  which  let  them  alone,  and  they  never  fail 
to  give  trouble  where  they  are  meddled  with."  The 
gifted  writer  proved  his  positions  by  ample  references 
to  universal  history.  He  closed  his  arguments  by  rec- 
ommending the  entire  banishment  of  religious  matters 
.  from  the  sphere  of  legislation,  and  the  quenching  of  the 
quarrels  of  priests  by  an  attitude  of  indifference.  This 
indifference  is  in  fact,  thought  he,  the  greatest  mark  of 
respect  which  a  political  body  can  show  to  religion ; 
but  this  opinion  was  very  far  from  the  teachings  of 
Bossuet  and  Rousseau.  The  poet,  on  this  occasion,  was 
a  true  vates,  a  prophet.  Unhappily  he  was  not  in  the 
Assembly,  and  his  sentiments  found  there  but  a  feeble 
echo. 

The  question  of  the  non-juring  clergy  was  perpetually 
the  order  of  the  day  in  the  Legislative  Assembly.  The 
continual  disturbances  in  the  provinces  ever  brought  it 
up  anew,  and  it  was  ever  resolved  with  increasing  harsh- 
ness against  the  refractory  clergy.  The  emigrants  were 
openly  preparing  for  war  against  the  Revolution,  and  it 
was  perfectly  clear  that  the  obnoxious  priests  were  their 
strongest  allies;  therefore  as  often  as  one  decree  was 
hurled  against  the  former,  another  was  forged  against 
the  latter.  The  debates  were  for  some  time  carried  on 
by  the  mediocre  members,  and  with  little  ability.  The 
Assembly  was  at  first  very  inexperienced,  and  the  most 
ridiculous,  resolutions  were  constantly  presented.  For 
example,  Deputy  Duval,  after  having  proclaimed  him- 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  155 

self  a  child  of  nature  by  the  grace  of  the  plow,  (as  could 
readily  be  proved  by  the  oxen,  those  pure  and  incor- 
ruptible wit/iesses  of  his  labors,)  moved  that  every  priest 
who  would  not  take  oath  to  obey  all  the  new  laws  be 
required,  on  pais  of  imprisonment,  to  wear  upon  his  left 
shoulder  a  badge  bearing  the  words :  Priest  suspected  of 
sedition. 

The  question  which  finally  presented  itself  was 
whether  the  constitution  should  not  be  suspended  in 
order  to  crush  the  opposing  clergy ;  whether,  in  addition 
to  refusing  them  liberty  of  worship,  they  should  not  also 
be  denied  civil  rights.  The  problem  therefore  was 
whether  liberty  was  to  be  founded  by  liberty,  or  by  the 
arbitrary  and  the  unjust.  As  early  as  the  seventh  of 
October,  1791,  the  too  famous  Couthon*  raised  a  sort 
of  yell  of  fury  against  the  non-juring  clergy.  He  in- 
sinuated that  the  forms  of  justice  should  be  refused  to 
them,  for  the  reason  that  in  the  districts  under  their 
influence  it  would  be  difficult  to  find  proof  against 
them.  Some  days  later  the  unknown  Deputy  Lejeune 
intensified  these  views,  and  declared  that  the  country 
had  no  worse  enemy  than  a  fanatical  priest,  and  that 
the  sole  question  was,  how  to  stop  his  pernicious  influ- 
ence. "  It  is  not  a  question  of  religious  liberty,"  said 
he,  "  but  of  safety  of  the  country."  He  then  proposed 
that  all  non-juring  priests  be  required  within  two  weeks 
to  fix  their  residence  in  the  chief  town  of  their  province. 
A  constitutional  Bishop,  Fauchet,  had  the  sad  honor  of 
seconding  these  measures  of  intolerance.  He  was  a 
man  of  ready,  impassioned  speech,  and  had  won  a  name 
*  See  Appendix,  note  20. 


150        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  ■ 

for  eloquence  in  the  court,  where  he  had  preached  in  his 
youth.  His  enthusiasm  for  the  Revolution  had  pro- 
cured him  the  bishopric  of  Caen,  and  a  seat  in  the  As- 
sembly. He  there  exhibited  the  fire  of  a  democrat  and 
the  bitterness  of  a  priest  whose  authority  was  contested 
in  his  own  diocese.  He  was  not  naturally  a  bad  man, 
but  he  had  been  spoiled  by  the  clubs,  and  now  he  gave 
himself  up  to  the  current  of  the  moment.  He  was  un- 
measured in  his  invectives  against  the  non-juring  clergy, 
and  declared  that  liberty  was  incompatible  with  fanati- 
cism. His  own  revolutionary  fanaticism,  and  the  unjust 
measures  which  he  pleaded  for  against  his  former  col- 
leagues, furnished  the  best  proof  of  his  assertion. 
"Atheists,"  said  he,  "are  angels  in  comparison  with 
these  priests."  Fauchet  demanded  the  suspension  of 
the  salaries  which  had  been  accorded  to  the  non-juring 
priests,  on  the  ground  that  it  was  not  right  to  pay  them 
for  keeping  the  country  in  a  ferment.  He  asserted  that 
poverty  would  soon  chase  away  those  who  remained 
"  cuirassed  in  their  pretended  conscience ;"  for  the  people 
would  soon  weary  of  paying  for  a  worship  which  they 
could  have  more  easily  and  more  majestically  in  the 
government  churches.  Sad  language  for  a  Bishop — 
this  speculating  on  the  baser  sentiments  of  human  na- 
ture. Happily  for  the  honor  of  man  this  calculation 
has  always  proved  false ;  the  conscience  can  neither  be 
bought  by  gold  nor  cowed  by  the  sword.  Fauchet  was 
too  fast ;  the  time  was  not  yet  come  for  such  action. 
His  discourse  displeased  the  Assembly.  He  was  justly 
reproached  with  having  preached  vengeance  in  the  name 
of  the  Gospel.    A  brother  Bishop,  Torne,  refuted  his 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  ^  157 

positions,  and  was  applauded  when  he  invoked  religious 
liberty  in  favor  of  the  non-jurors.  "  Let  us  beware," 
said  he,  "  of  regarding  their  errors  as  a  political  crime  ; 
fanaticism  only  increases  by  opposition.  The  refractory 
priest  who  propagates  his  faith  only  makes  use  of  his 
natural  liberty.  Under  the  regime  of  liberty  let  us 
have  no  punishment  without  judgment,  no  judgment 
without  trial."  Such  language  saved  the  honor  of  the 
new  clergy,  so  gravely  compromised  by  Fauchet. 
Tome's  discourse  was  ordered  to  be  printed  "  in  expia- 
tion of  the  intolerant  speech  which  had  preceded  it." 
In  vain  Fauchet  returned  to  the  charge.  He  was 
laughed  at  when  he  invoked  the  pity  of  the  Assembly 
for  a  salaried  priesthood,  on  account  of  a  few  stones 
which  had  been  cast  at  a  Curate  by  some  women  who 
disliked  him.  The  majority  of  the  Assembly  was 
against  him.  Davignon  demanded  that  the  non-juring 
worship  be  put  on  the  same  footing  as  that  of  the  Prot- 
estants and  the  Jews ;  Monneron,  that  the  factious  be 
punished  not  as  priests,  but  as  rebels.  Others  showed 
that  the  only  alternative  was  either  to  guarantee  relig- 
ious liberty,  or  to  turn  persecutor.  A  few  Deputies 
caught  a  clear  view  of  the  only  remedy  for  the  difficul- 
ties, and  proposed  informally  the  leaving  of  the  support 
of  all  worship  to  the  free  gifts  of  the  faithful.  Ducos, 
in  his  earnest  pleas  for  liberty  of  conscience,  showed 
himself  a  true  disciple  of  Mirabeau.  "It  is  unjust  and 
impolitic,"  said  he,  "to  give  a  preference  to  any  wor- 
ship whatever.  Let  us,  therefore,  separate  State  mat- 
ters from  matters  of  Church,  treat  the  manifestation  of 
religious  opinions  as  we  treat  other  opinions,  regard 


158      .  Bdigion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

religious  meetings  as  we  regard  other  reunions  of  citi- 
zens, and  allow  every  sect  to  choose  whom  it  please, 
Avhether  it  be  a  bishop  or  an  iman,  a  minister  or  a  rabbi, 
just  as  we  allow  popular  assemblies  to  elect  whom  they 
will  for  president  and  secretaries."  Ducos  went  on  to 
make  inferences  from  his  principles,  and  severely  con- 
demned the  Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy  and  the  po- 
litical oath. 

The  capital  speech  on  this  subject  was  pronounced  by 
Gensonne.  He  had  just  claims  on  the  confidence  of  the 
Assembly,  for  he  had  traversed  the  disaffected  districts 
and  obtained  a  thorough  knowledge  of  the  troubles.  He 
showed  that  all  that  the  people  wanted  was  religious  lib- 
erty, and  that  the  Revolution  had  committed  a  grave 
error  by  regarding  all  as  disloyal  who,  by  error  or  by  con- 
science, had  remained  attached  to  their  former  Pastors. 
He  declared  that  a  grave  mistake  had  been  committed 
in  identifying  love  of  country  with  the  acceptance  of 
this  or  that  form  of  worship,  a  course  which  had  sub- 
jected the  ignorant  but  honest  people  of  the  country 
districts  to  innumerable  vexations  and  persecutions. 
The  only  remedy  possible  was  simply  the  guaranteeing  of 
full  religious  liberty.  And  yet  at  this  very  moment  the 
radicals  were  pleading  for  the  imprisonment  of  all  non- 
conforming priests.  Their  arguments,  based  on  the  plea 
of  the  public  safety,  were  ably  refuted  by  Gensonne. 
He  showed  that  such  general  proscrij^tions  involved 
every  injustice,  confounded  the  innocent  with  the  guilty, 
and  established  an  inquisition  of  the  conscience.  "  Re- 
member," said  he,  in  closing,  "  that  respect  for  individual 
liberty  is  the  surest  guarantee  of  public  liberty,  and  that 


ReUgion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  159 

one  must  never  cease  to  be  just  even  to  an  enemy." 
The  orator  earned  the  Assembly  with  him  ;  but  it  was 
rather  from  sentiment  than  from  conviction.  His  dis- 
course was  ordered  to  be  printed,  and  a  report  to  be 
made  within  the  next  eight  days  on  the  propositions 
which  he  had  made.  A  faithful  following  of  the  coun- 
sels of  that  day  would  have  saved  infinite  misfortune. 
Unfortunately,  the  news  of  fresh  troubles  in  the  provinces 
rjuickly  turned  the  majority  to  the  side  of  arbitrary  and 
despotic  measures. 

Two  days  after  this  speech  a,  special  courier  informed 
the  Assembly  of  grave  troubles  in  the  West.  He  bore 
a  report  which  deeply  incriminated  the  non-conforming 
clergy.  It  declared  that  meetings  of  people  to  the 
number  of  four  thousand  had  been  held  in  several  places 
for  the  purpose  of  nocturnal  processions  and  other  re- 
ligious rites,  and  that. when  it  was  attempted  to  disperse 
them  they  had  armed  themselves  with  guns,  or  pikes 
and  scythes.  Conflicts  with  the  National  Guards  had 
taken  place,  and  the  popular  fury  had  attacked  the  con- 
>titutional  clergy,  and  reopened  churches  to  the  non- 
juring  priests.  This  report,  though  admitting  that  the 
people  had  armed  themselves  only  after  having  been 
disturbed  in  their  religious  rights,  caused  equal  alarm 
and  indignation  in  the  Assembly.  The  stomi  was  ev- 
idently muttering  in  the  distance.  Isnard  cried  out  that 
moderation  had  compromised  every  thing,  that  toleration 
might  work  well  enough  in  times  of  calm,  but  that  no 
indulgence  should  be  shown  to  those  who  would  not 
tolerate  the  laws.  "It  is  time,"  said  he,  "that  every 
thing  should  bow  to  the  authority  of  the  nation,  that 


1G0        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

tiaras,  diadems,  and  censers  should  yield  to  the  scepter 
of  law."  While  this  matter  was  pending,  news  of  se- 
rious troubles  at  Caen  arrived.  Numbers  of  the  old 
nobility  and  of  the  emigrated  French  had  returned  and 
assisted  with  parade  at  the  services  of  refractory  priests. 
Tumults,  in  which  blood  was  shed,  resulted.  The  local 
authorities  had  then  taken  measures  which  conflicted 
with  an  existing  law.  Isnard  urged  the  Assembly  to 
suspend  the  ordinary  processes  of  the  law,  in  order  the 
more  quickly  and  the  more  terribly  to  strike  down  these 
enemies  of  the  Revolution.  He  spoke  from  the  midst 
of  the  Girondists,  in  the  very  tones  of  a  St.  Just  and  a 
Robespierre.  The  time,  however,  was  not  yet  ripe  to 
put  his  recommendations  into  practice. 

A  little  later  we  find  Isnard  again  at  the  assault.  Under 
pretext  that  the  priests  had  in  their  hand  the  most  power- 
ful means  of  seducing  the  people,  he  urged  to  the  greatest 
severity,  and  plead  for  nothing  less  than  a  decree  of  exile 
against  all  who  would  not  take  the  oath.  "  Do  you  not 
see,"  said  he,  "  that  we  must  separate  the  priests  from  the 
people  whom  they  lead  astray,  and  send  the  pests  to  Italy 
and  to  Rome?"  He  argued  that  if  the  arbitrary  is 
criminal  in  the  service  of  despotism,  it  becomes  a  great 
act  of  justice  in  the  cause  of  liberty — not  seeming  to  see 
that  the  arbitrary  is  itself  the  very  essence  of  despotism. 
He  argued  that  the  complaint  of  a  single  person  should 
be  sufficient  to  justify  the  exile  of  a  priest,  and  regarded 
as  excessive  indulgence  the  pretention  not  to  condemn 
him  except  on  proof.  Such  principles  passed  for  liberal 
in  November,  1791,  at  the  same  tribune  where  Mirabeau 
had  so  nobly  defended  the  rights  of  conscience.  The 


ReUgUm  amdtht  Reign  of  Terror.  101 


speeches  of  Isnard  produced  l  profound  impression 
despite  their  sophisms  and  excesses,  for  they  gushed  out 
of  a  heart  on  tire  with  enthusiasm.  He  was  thoroughly 
convinced  and  perfectly  sincere.  His  discourses  would 
have  been  printed  had  he  not  shocked  the  religious  senti- 
ment by  exclaiming,  M  My  God  is  the  law ;  I  acknowledge 
no  other."  This  deity  was  for  him,  however,  a  very  in- 
definite character,  being  nothing  other  than  the  public 
safety — or  rather,  the  will  of  the  populace. 

On  the  6th  of  November,  1791,  Francois  de  Neu- 
chateau  presented,  in  the  name  of  the  Legislative  Com- 
mittee, a  project  of  law  which  involved,  in  itself,  all 
sorts  of  iniquities.  After  manifold  modifications  it  be- 
came the  law  of  the  nation.  The  civil  oath,  which  in- 
cluded an  approval  of  the  new  Church  Constitution,  was 
to  be  taken  within  one  week  by  all  non-functioning  eccle- 
BUMrtMffi,  on  pain  of  forfeiture  of  the  salaries  allowed  them 
by  the  first  Assembly  ;  every  priest  convicted  of  having 
excited  religious  tumults  was  to  suffer  imprisonment 
for  two  years :  extraordinary  penalties  were  reserved  for 
those  convicted  of  intriguing  with  foreigners;  and  the 
prie-ts  were  to  be  regarded  as  responsible  for  all  pillage 
or  murders  committed  by  riots  excited  by  them,  or  on 
their  account.  This  law  is  the  shame  of  the  Legislature 
which  enacted  it,  and  finds  its  only  shadow  of  apology 
in  the  use  which  the  enemies  of  France  were  then  busy 
in  making  of  the  religious  sentiments  of  the  non-con- 
forming Catholics.  To  require  such  an  oath  was  to  vio- 
late the  conscience  ;  to  refuse  the  salaries  was  to  break  a 
solemn  pledge ;  and  to  hold  the  priests  thus  responsible 
was  to  make  them  liable  for  mobs  which,  in  some  cases, 

21 


162        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

they  themselves  could  not  even  have  prevented.  This 
law  received  a  worthy  crowning  in  a  supplementary 
article  which  indirectly  and  hypocritically  suppressed 
the  liberty  of  worship.  It  required  the  civil  oath  of  all 
who  rented  a  locality  for  the  celebration  of  religious 
rites.  The  law,  as  a  whole,  was  a  violent  outrage  on  the 
declaration  of  rights  in  the  Constitution,  and  the  King, 
in  vetoing  it,  was  really  more  liberal  than  this  democratic 
Assembly. 

The  most  of  the  historians  of  the  Revolution,  in  view- 
ing this  decree,  commit  the  wrong  of  judging  it  in  the 
light  of  the  public  dangers,  and  not  in  the  light  of 
justice,  which  is  synonymous  with  liberty.  This  is  the 
case  with  Louis  Blanc  and  Michelet.  When  the  decree 
was  brought  to  the  royal  council  the  ministers  approved 
it,  but  they  found  an  invincible  resistance  in  the  King. 
It  is  of  no  avail  to  say  that  this  unhappy  prince  had 
courage  in  nothing  but  the  defense  of  the  priests;  in 
this  case  he  assuredly  obeyed  his  profoundest  and  most 
sacred  convictions ;  and,  had  the  Assembly  yielded,  the 
result  would  have  been  infinitely  better  for  the  liberal 
cause.  But  this  body,  rendered  furious  by  the  war  which 
the  Kings  of  Europe  were  preparing  against  France, 
thought  only  of  crushing  every  obstacle,  and,  meeting 
the  royal  veto  in  their  path,  they  rested  not  till  they 
had  overturned  the  throne  itself. 

The  royal  veto  deeply  agitated  the  nation.  It  checked 
the  legal  persecution,  but  it  increased  the  popular  rage. 
It  was'  around  this  question  that  the  great  battle  was 
fought  between  the  Constitutionalists  of  1789  and  the 
hot  radicals  of  1791  ;  between  the  friends  of  liberty  and 


Religion  and  ike  Reign  of  Terror.  163 


the  champions  of  mad  democracy.  The  victory  fell  to 
the  latter,  for  the  fever  of  the  moment  and  the  danger  of 
foreign  war  played  into  their  hands. 

The  struggle  began  at  Paris.  A  majority  of  the  Di- 
rectory of  the  Seine  consisted  of  members  and  partUan> 
of  the  former  Assembly.  They  stood  up  earnestly  for 
the  great  principles  of  17S9.  They  regarded  the  recent 
decree  of  the  Legislative  Assembly  as  a  violence  against 
true  liberty,  and  solemnly  petitioned  the  King  to  refuse 
his  sanction.  This  petition,  which  the  apologists  of  the 
Revolution  generally  condemn  as  an  attempt  at  reac- 
tion, bears  throughout  the  impress  of  the  highest  and 
most  consistent  liberalism.  It  is  the  language  of  right 
and  justice  themselves.  After  protesting  their  love  of 
the  Revolution,  and  their  hatred  of  fanaticism,  they 
charge  the  Assembly  with  unintentionally  voting  meas- 
ures which  contlicted  equally  with  the  Constitution, 
with  justice,  and  with  prudence.  They  objected  to  the 
decree  that  it  broke  the  national  faith  by  taking  from 
the  non-functioning  priests  the  salary  they  had  been 
promised  ;  that  it  prettied  a  sort  of  proscribed  class,  and 
unjustly  incarcerated  the  priests  wherever  troubles 
might  break  out ;  and  that  it  violated  the  rights  of  con- 
science by  refusing  to  non-jurors  the  liberty  of  worship. 
They  showed  with  as  much  eloquence  as  reason,  that  in 
thus  treating  with  injustice  a  whole  class  of  citizens,  the 
Assembly  was  only  opposing  fanaticism  to  fanaticism, 
and  restoring  the  odious  principles  in  the  name  of  which 
the  Ca?sars  had  persecuted  the  first  Christians,  and 
Look  XIV.  proscribed  the  Protestants.  "  Has  a  whole 
century  of  philosophy,"  asked  they,  "  sufficed  only  to 


164        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

bring  us  back  to  the  intolerance  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury ?  Since  no  religion  is  required  by  the  law,  why 
should  any  religion  be  a  crime  ?  For  these  reasons, 
and  in  the  sacred  name  of  liberty,  of  the  constitution, 
and  of  the  public  good,  we  beg  you,  Sire,  to  refuse  your 
sanction  to  the  decree."  This  noble  petition  is  taxed 
by  Louis  Blanc  with  arrogance,  and  by  Michelet  with 
being  a  vain  abstraction.  It  met  with  violent  opposi- 
tion in  the  populace  of  Paris.  It  was  attacked  in  the 
clubs  and  by  the  press.  The  Leaguers  of  former  times 
reappeared  at  the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century  as  in- 
tolerant, in  a  contrary  sense,  as  they  had  once  been 
under  the  Guises.  The  demagogues  got  up  a  scene  to 
counteract  the  influence  of  the  petition.  Deputations 
from  various  sections  of  Paris  appeared  at  the  bar  of 
the  Assembly,  with  protests  against  the  petition  of  the 
Directory.  The  most  of  these  protests  bear  the  impress 
of  a  disgusting  coarseness.  An  orator  of  one  of  the 
faubourgs  cried  out  thus  to  the  refractory  priests : 
"  You  monsters,  who  suck  the  milk  of  crime,  your  God 
is  the  god  of  the  passions,  but  ours  is»that  of  clemency." 
Strange  introduction  to  a  demand  for  proscription.  But 
the  honors  of  the  occasion  fell  to  the  incomparable  pam- 
phleteer of  democracy,  Camille  Desmoulins,  who  could  so 
well  translate  into  caustic  wit  the  rage  of  the  populace. 
He  charged  the  Directory  with  having  drawn  up  a  sub- 
scription paper  for  civil  war,  ready  for  the  signatures  of 
all  the  fanatics,  all  the  idiots,  all  the  slaves,  all  the  ci- 
devant  thieves  of  the  eighty-three  departments,  at  the 
head  of  whom  stood  the  petitioners  themselves.  Ap- 
pealing to  the  sovereignty  of  the  popular  will,  and  re- 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  1G5 

marking  that  no  royal  veto  could  have  prevented  the 
taking  of  the  Bastille,  he  called  for  the  immediate  exe- 
cution of  the  decree,  in  spite  and  in  defiance  of  the 
King.  He  demanded  procedure  against  the  Directory 
for  having  signed  a  paper  which  tended  to  oppose  the 
legislators  of  the  people.  He  closed  thus  :  "  Fathers  of 
the  country,  disdain  all  sophisms.  Doubt  no  longer  the 
omnipotence  of  a  free  people.  If  the  head  sleeps,  how 
shall  the  arm  act  ?  It  is  the  leaders  who  must  be  at- 
tacked. Strike  at  the  heart.  Use  the  musket  against 
conspiring  princes,  the  rod  against  an  insolent  Direc- 
tory, and  exorcise  the  demon  of  fanaticism  by  fasting." 
Surely  it  would  have  been  enough  to  commit  injustice, 
without  making  merry  over  it.  The  proposition  to  de- 
prive the  priests  of  what  had  been  solemnly  guaranteed 
to  them  did  not  become  the  less  odious  by  this  stroke 
of  pleasantry.  That  nothing  should  lack  to  the  scandal, 
it  was  a  bishop,  Fauchet,  who  lent  his  voice  to  Desmou- 
lins  by  reading  this  perfidious  piece.  It  was  ordered  to 
be  printed  and  spread  over  the  country.  It  is  surpris- 
ing that  after  more  than  half  a  century  we  have  still 
apologists  for  such  demagogism.  Let  it  teach  us  at 
least  never  to  prefer  revolution  to  liberty. 

The  King  persisted  in  his  veto.  His  agreeing  with 
the  Directory  increased  the  popular  ill-will,  and  from 
this  moment  he  became  the  central  object  of  attack. 
Xothing  can  equal  the  insults  and  outrages  which  the 
democratic  press  now  heaped  upon  him.  Prudhomme 
compared  the  royal  veto  to  a  chain  and  ball,  which  the 
Assembly  were  slavishly  dragging  about.  He  was  held 
Up  to  derision  as  one  who  was  beset  nigJit  and  day  by  a 


166        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

vindictive  wife  and  a  bigoted  sister.  He  was  rudely  told 
that  the  Bourbons  owed  to  the  nation  all  their  importance. 

The  effects  of  the  veto  were  different,  according  to 
the  departments.  At  Paris,  in  spite  of  the  Jacobins 
and  the  mob,  the  Directory  remained  for  a  time  the 
stronger.  Some  churches  were  opened  for  the  non- 
juring  priests,  and  the  service  unmolested.  Still  the 
cause  of  irreligion  made  progress  day  by  day,  and  the 
Jacobin  club  was  constantly  the  theater  of  violent  decla- 
mations against  Christianity.  In  the  departments  the 
greatest  anarchy  reigned.  Some  followed  the  example 
of  the  true  liberals  of  Paris ;  while  others,  ignoring  the 
royal  veto,  executed  the  decree  as  if  it  had  had  the 
force  of  law.  In  some  places  considerable  numbers  of 
priests  had  been  thrown  into  prison,  where  they  en- 
dured, without  a  hearing,  the  severest  captivity,  and 
would  certainly  have  died  of  hunger  had  it  not  been 
for  the  charities  of  the  faithful.  This  created  the  great- 
est indignation  in  the  parishes  thus  deprived  of  their 
Curates.  In  other  places,  though  not  imprisoned,  they 
were  violently  hurried  to  the  chief  place  of  the  district, 
put  under  a  suspicious  police,  and,  worse  still,  forbidden 
to  celebrate  mass.  At  Nantes  they  were  forced  to  ap- 
pear at  a  roll-call  twice  a  day.  In  one  place  they  were 
forbidden  to  assemble  more  than  three  in  the  same  spot. 
In  various  places  the  persecution  fell  on  private  persons 
also.  At  Rennes  they  were  fined  six  francs  for  every 
attendance  at  an  interdicted  mass.  Their  worship  was 
disturbed  by  force.  It  was  in  vain  that  the  non-juring 
priests  retired  to  the  most  obscure  recesses ;  they  were 
hunted  out,  and  if  discovered  with  a  chalice,  or  any 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  167 

sign  of  a  priestly  ornament,  were  exposed  to  severe 
penalties  and  popular  insult.  In  some  localities  where 
the  accused  priests  were  brought  before  the  judges  they 
received  justice ;  generally,  however,  they  were  the 
objects  of  arbitrary  measures  on  the  part  of  all  branches 
of  the  police.  The  resistance  of  the  truly  liberal  au- 
thorities served  only  to  give  greater  pretext  to  the  vio- 
lence of  the  populace.  We  may  judge  from  what  took 
place  in  Paris  in  March,  1792,  of  the  severe  sufferings 
in  other  parts  of  France  of  all  who  remained  faithful  to 
the  old-fashioned  Catholic  faith.  A  band  of  ruffians 
had  burst  into  the  convent  of  Dominican  nuns,  threat- 
ening to  demolish  the  whole  establishment  if  the  consti- 
tutional priest  was  not  immediately  received.  "  I  would 
fear,''  writes  the  Prioress  to  the  Pope,  "  too  deeply  to 
affect  your  paternal  heart  were  I  to  describe  to  you  all 
the  violent  measures  which  have  been  used  to  shake  our 
fidelity,  the  hostile  mobs  which  surrounded  us,  the  con- 
tinual menaces  of  nocturnal  pillage,  and  all  our  fear  and 
terror.  Xo  ;  I  will  not  speak  of  these  things,  for  we 
rejoice  to  be  found  worthy  of  suffering  somewhat  for 
the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  and  the  honor  of  the  Church, 
our  mother." 

The  Prioress  of  the  schools  of  St.  Charles  in  Paris 
describes  in  an  equally  touching  letter,  the  outrages  she 
Buffered  for  having  refused  to  receive  the  new  priest, 
whom  she  regarded  as  simply  an  intruder.  The  latter 
had  applied  to  a  club,  and  secured  a  crowd  of  ruffians 
to  enforce  his  claim.  On  Sunday,  followed  by  these 
fellows  in  procession,  he  approached  the  convent,  and 
cried  out,  "  Open  your  chapel  and  ring  your  bell."    "  I 


108        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

refused  both,"  writes  the  Prioress.  "The  cries  were 
redoubled,  the  axes  distributed,  and  the  walls  scaled. 
My  faithful  companions  and  I,  prostrate  at  the  foot  of 
the  cross  in  a  retired  room,  lay  expecting  death,  and  offer- 
ing our  lives  to  God."  The  Prioress  had  the  chagrin  of 
seeing  one  of  the  sisters  finally  open  the  door  to  the 
new  priest.  She  vainly  resisted  for  three  days  the  new 
order  of  things,  and  was  ultimately  compelled  to  dis- 
perse the  society  and  take  flight.  If  such  things  took 
place  at  Paris,  it  is  easy  to  imagine  to  what  greater  vio- 
lence the  revolutionary  fury  was  carried  in  the  prov- 
inces. At  Rochelle  and  elsewhere  the  nuns  had  been 
whipped  with  rods.  The  same  outrage  had  been  suf- 
fered by  some  young  ladies  who  had  attended  the  pro- 
scribed worship.  The  Minister  of  the  Interior  cited  a 
case  of  a  man  whose  corpse  had  been  exhumed  from  the 
cemetery  and  buried  in  the  public  cross-roads,  for  the 
reason  that  he  had  refused  to  attend  the  mass  of  a  State- 
Church  priest.  In  some  cases,  municipal  officers  forcibly 
seized  children  from  their  parents  and  had  them  bap- 
tized by  the  new  priests ;  in  others  they  had  inflicted 
fines  on  parents  who  had  not  presented  their  children 
for  such  baptism. 

This  persecution  did  not  meet  every-where  with  gentle 
lambs,  ready  to  submit  without  murmur.  It  was  man- 
fully resisted,  and  came  near  involving  the  land  in  civil 
war.  Still,  if  prudent  measures  had  been  adopted, 
quietude  might  have  been  restored  even  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  year  1792.  All  that  was  necessary  to  re- 
store harmony  between  the  Assembly  and  the  King, 
and  to  pacify  the  provinces,  was  simply  full  liberty  of 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  169 


worship,  honestly  granted  and  faithfully  guaranteed. 
The  non-juring  priests  expressly  denied,  in  a  public 
document,  all  the  charges  of  disloyalty  which  had  been 
heaped  upon  them.  u  You  accuse  us,*'  said  they  to  the 
government,  "  of  being  the  authors  of  all  the  dissensions 
of  the  count ly,  of  neglecting  to  pay  our  taxes,  of  being 
in  intelligence  with  the  foreign  enemy,  and  of  inviting 
war  with  all  our  influence.  How  is  it  that  of  so  many 
priests  accused,  you  have  found  no  one  guilty?  Surely 
the  hostile  surveillance  of  fifty  thousand  administrative 
corps,  aided  by  more  than  ten  thousand  clubs,  would 
have  sufficed  to  detect  plots  if  such  had  existed.  We 
declare  that  we  are  subject  to  all  the  public  authorities, 
and  that,  after  the  example  of  Christ,  we  regard  it  as  a 
duty  to  pay  tribute.  We  declare  that  our  most  ardent 
wish  is  for  the  return  of  peace  between  the  Church  and 
the  State.  Our  sole  resistance  consists  in  believing  that 
the  new  Constitutional  worship  is  not  the  Catholic  wor- 
ship, and  in  so  teaching.  This  one  point  excepted,  we 
are  entirely  submissive  to  the  civil  order  and  to  the 
laws ;  we  are  innocent  not  only  in  the  eyes  of  God,  but 
also  in  the  eyes  of  the  law."  It  would  have  been  wise 
policy  to  take  in  good  part  these  professions  of  so 
thorough-going  a  loyalty,  and  not  to  alienate  by  perse- 
cution the  hearts  of  this  powerful  partv. 

Such  was  the  opinion  of  the  Minister  of  the  Interior, 
Cahier  Gerville,  as  expressed  in  a  report  which  he  pre- 
sented to  the  Assembly  on  the  18th  of  February,  1792. 
After  reviewing  the  condition  of  the  land  he  closed  thus : 
"On  the  one  side  we  see  fanatics,  and  on  the  other  per- 
secutors.    It  seems  that  tolerance  is  exiled  from  the 

22 


170        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

kingdom.  In  all  the  provinces  the  liberty  of  worship 
has  been  almost  annulled.  Now  what  matters  it  to  the 
State,  whether  a  citizen  goes  to  mass  or  not  ?  All  that 
a  good  constitution  can  do  is,  to  favor  all  religions 
without  adopting  any  one.  There  is  in  France  no  na- 
tional religion.  Each  citizen  should  enjoy  freely  the  rights 
of  conscience,  and  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  time  is  not 
distant  when  each  shall  pay  for  his  own  worship.  The 
country  demands  laws  in  harmony  with  the  codes  of 
free  nations,  and  which  will  dispense  with  the  necessity 
of  pronouncing  the  words  priests  and  religion"  This 
was  well  said;  it  was  the  pure  spirit  of  1*789,  and  sug- 
gested the  only  remedy  for  the  troubles  of  the  country. 
It  was  applauded  in  the  Assembly,  though  it  did  not 
succeed  in  turning  it  from  its  detestable  public-safety 
policy.  The  next  month  the  ministry  was  dissolved  and 
a  new  one  formed,  the  Girondists  imposing  their  own 
men  upon  the  King.  Cahier  Gerville  gave  place  to  the 
rude  and  austere  Roland,*  who  was  less  a  liberal  than  a 
democrat. 

On  the  19th  of  March,  1792,  the  Pope  had  issued  an- 
other brief  full  of  felicitations  of  the  refractory  clergy. 
The  same  day  he  sent  another  to  the  refractory  Bishops, 
giving  them  for  the  time  being  extraordinary  powers. 
The  danger  of  excommunication  seems  to  have  had  but 
little  influence  on  the  constitutional  clergy.  A  few, 
however,  hesitated.  Gobel  had  had  secret  interviews  with 
a  Papal  agent ;  his  ignoble  mind  was  equally  capable 
of  a  vague  fear  and  a  bold  resolution.  The  fear  of  hell 
brought  him  back  to  the  Pope,  as  the  fear  of  the  popu- 
*  See  Appendix,  note  21. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  171 

lace  afterward  led  him  to  a  shameless  apostasy.  lie 
was  a  vile,  cowardly  aspirant.  The  Bishop  of  Rouen, 
unwilling  to  be  an  agent  of  persecution,  resigned  office 
without  leaving  his  party.  The  constitutional  clergy 
was  composed  of  two  classes  of  men — a  good  number 
of  respectable  priests  who  earnestly  labored  to  revive 
religion  in  France,  and  also  a  class  of  what  was  fitly 
called  the  offscourings  of  the  old  Church — some  of  them 
of  bad  morals,  and  others  hot-headed  clubbists.  The 
question  of  the  marriage  of  the  priests  had  been  agi- 
tated for  some  months.  It  had,  in  fact,  been  resolved 
legislatively ;  for  the  Assembly  had  decreed  that  pensions 
should  be  continued  to  priests  who  married.  Several 
constitutional  Curates  had  taken  advantage  of  this  au- 
thorization, but  the  Catholic  sentiment,  even  in  the  new 
Church,  had  thereby  been  deeply  wounded.  Aubert,  a 
Paris  Vicar,  had  given  special  prominence  to  his  mar- 
riage, but  had  succeeded  only  in  creating  a  great  scandal 
in  his  parish.  He  had  had  recourse  to  the  noisy  appro- 
bation of  the  clubs.  From  this  resulted  deplorable 
scenes,  well  calculated  to  bring  into  disrepute  the  new 
religion.  The  Assembly  committed  the  ridiculous  mis- 
take of  giving  a  public  reception  to  the  clerical  couple. 
In  his  speech  the  husband  insinuated  that  the  Bastille 
had  been  taken  in  order  to  facilitate  his  nuptials.  He 
was  continued  in  his  parish  in  defiance  of  his  Bishop, 
by  the  grace  of  the  clubs.  Subsequently  he  was  ap- 
pointed to  another  parish,  despite  the  protests  of  several 
Curates,  and  installed  with  great  pomp;  his  wife  occu- 
pied a  place  of  honor  in  the  choir.  If  the  days  of  per- 
secution had  not  come  to  its  aid,  the  new  Church  could 


172        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

not  have  risen  above  the  discredit  which  the  insulting  pa- 
tronage of  the  enemies  of  Christianity  was  fast  bringing 
upon  it.  It  is  certain  that  the  project  had  been  formed 
of  bringing  religion  into  contempt,  in  order  the  sooner 
to  get  rid  of  it.  But  it  was  necessary  first  to  crush  the 
refractory  priests,  and  from  the  entrance  of  the  Girond- 
ists into  the  King's  cabinet  nothing  had  been  spared  to 
accomplish  this  result. 

The  butcher,  Legendre,*  had  faithfully  expressed  the 
thought  of  the  Jacobins  when  he  cried  out  in  the  club, 
"  Let  the  refractory  priest  be  punished  severely.  Let 
him  either  take  his  head  to  the  scaffold  or  his  body  to 
the  galleys.  When  a  farmer  finds  a  noxious  worm  he 
puts  it  under  foot."  Easter  day  was  an  occasion  for  new 
outrages.  At  Lyons  a  mob  had  broken  into  the  churches, 
and  the  police  rewarded  the  rioters  by  closing  the 
chapels  of  all  the  convents.  The  church  of  St.  Claire, 
which  had  not  been  closed,  was  the  theater  of  shameless 
violence.  Women  were  covered  with  mud  and  then 
dragged  through  the  streets  of  the  city;  and  this  was 
silently  suffered  by  the  magistrates.  An  attempte  was 
made  to  violate,  directly,  the  conscience  of  the  King. 
Guadet  prepared  an  order  asking  him  imperatively  to 
take  a  new  confessor.  It  was  to  be  signed  by  the  King's 
council  and  then  presented  ;  but  Dumouriez  refused,  and 
defeated  it.  He  would  not  allow  the  King  to  be  troubled 
in  his  conscience  by  the  consent  of  his  own  council. 
He  said  that  he  had  a  full  right  to  take  for  his  adviser 
an  Iman,  a  Rabbi,  a  Papist,  or  a  Calvinist,  without  con- 
sulting any  one  but  himself.  Wisdom  would  have  ap- 
*  See  Appendix,  note  22. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  173 

plied  this  rule  to  the  whole  nation ;  but  the  Girondists, 
at  the  moment  when  they  were  doing  all  in  their  power 
to  over-excite  the  revolutionary  fever,  were  little  dis- 
posed to  respect  religious  scruples.  The  Assembly 
marched  straight  forward  to  the  accomplishment  of  its 
two  designs — the  debasement  of  the  royal  authority, 
and  the  outlawing  of  the  non-conforming  clergy.  It 
began  by  the  destruction  of  what  remained  of  the  re- 
ligious orders.  The  first  Assembly  had  not  presumed 
at  once  to  abolish  the  corporations  of  monastic  teachers, 
for  they  had  well  deserved  of  the  nation.  But  the  Leg- 
islative Assembly  saw  in  them  only  a  stronghold  of  the 
ancient  Church,  and  hastened  to  crush  them  into  the 
dust.  Holy  Friday  was  ruthlessly  chosen  for  giving 
this  bitter  stroke  to  the  hearts  of  the  Catholics.  Bishop 
Lecoz  sought  in  vain  to  moderate  the  action  and  make 
its  execution  gradual.  Deputy  Lagrevol  increased  its 
severity  by  causing  to  be  stricken  out  the  exception '  in 
favor  of  the  jSisters  of  Charity,  whom  he  stigmatized  as 
vermin.  Torne  claimed,  at  least,  the  respect  of  the  As- 
sembly for  the  illustrious  orders  which  it  was  abolishing, 
but  in  the  end  aggravated  the  law  by  adding  to  it  a 
clause  suppressing  the  costume  which  the  priests  had 
worn  from  time  immemorial.  This  latter  measure  was 
singularly  impolitic.  It  ignored  the  wonderful  influence 
which  external  signs  have  over  an  ignorant  people.  It 
was  a  useless  irritation.  As  soon  as  the  motion  of  Torne 
was  adopted,  the  Bishop  of  Limoges  rose  and  declared 
that  he  would  sacrifice  his  episcopal  vestments  for  the 
support  of  a  national  soldier;  and  Fauchet,  more  pliant 
still,  took  oft'  immediately  his  little  clerical  cap  and 


174:        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

put  it  into  his  pocket,  to  the  great  applause  of  the 
spectators. 

Minister  Roland  knew  well  haw  to  continue  and  in- 
crease the  hostility  of  the  Assembly  against  the  refrac- 
tory priests.  On  the  16th  of  April  he  announced  to  the 
Assembly  that,  troubles  having  broken  out  in  a  certain 
province,  public  opinion  had  charged  them  on  the  non- 
juring  clergy,  and  had  demanded  their  deportation.  .A 
municipality  had  decreed  their  expulsion,  and  thus  had 
restored  order,  though  the  action  was  unconstitutional. 
The  Assembly  understood  this  recital  as  an  advice.  A 
few  days  later,  Roland  again  called  attention  to  the  re- 
ligious troubles.  He  gave  a  terrible  picture  of  them, 
intensifying  the  colors  at  pleasure,  and  mercilessly  de- 
scribed the  non-juring  priests  as  madmen,  sowing  every- 
where, in  neighborhoods  and  families,  hatred  and  dis- 
cord. He  admitted  frankly  the  illegality  of  the  measures 
which  had  been  taken  against  them;  but,  far  from 
blaming  these  cruel  acts  and  indignities  #  from  which 
they  had  already  suffered,  he,  on  the  contrary,  presented 
with  manifest  approbation  the  apology  which  their 
authors  had  offered.  Roland  asked,  not  the  cessation  of 
these  unconstitutional  proceedings,  but  that  they  should 
be  rendered  legal  by  the  enactment  of  more  severe  meas- 
ures, and  by  constraining  the  King  to  give  his  consent. 
He  plainly  counseled  a  measure  of  deportation  against 
the  non-juring  clergy.  Merlin  warmly  seconded  the 
advice  of  the  minister,  and  proposed,  to  the  applause  of 
the  Assembly,  that  all  the  troublesome  priests  should 
be  placed  on  vessels  and  sent  to  America.  Vergniaud, 
after  proposing  the  reference  of  the  matter  to  a  com- 


Rdigion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  175 

mittee,  said,  "It  is  time  to  declare  war  on  your  enemies, 
since  they  declare  it  against  you,  but  to  declare  it  in  the 
name  of  the  law."  On  the  26th  of  April,  1792,  Fran- 
cois de  Nantes  reported  the  recommendations  of  the 
Committee.  It  was  the  most  ridiculously  declamatory 
document  imaginable.  It  vailed,  under  the  flowers  of  a 
tawdry  rhetoric,  an  abominable  project  of  proscription. 
The  orator  indulged  in  the  most  outrageous  insinuations 
■gainst  religion.  He  regretted  bitterly  the  times  when 
primitive  men  erected  altars  of  flowers  to  a  primitive 
god,  which  in  his  opinion  was  equivalent  to  the  god  of 
gardens.  It  is  impossible  to  form  any  other  idea  of  this 
piece  of  sentimental  bombast  than  that  it  is  a  formal  con- 
demnation of  all  positive  religion,  and  especially  of 
Christianity.  But  the  poor  Pope  is  the  object  of  special 
a— ault.  He  is  represented  as  a  prince  indulging  in  bur- 
K  -.me  menaces,  and  ambitious  of  assuming  the  airs  of 
Jupiter  with  his  thunderbolts,  but  whose  impotent  shafts 
fall  powerless  on  the  buckler  of  Liberty,  who  now  keeps 
station  on  the  summit  of  the  Alps.  He  announced  thus 
his  approaching  downfall:  "Soon  the  slaves  of  a  priest 
will  remember  that  they  were  once  citizens  of  Rome. 
They  will  say.  It  is  here  that  Brutus  lived,  and  Italy  will 
be  free."  He  aftected  to  despise  the  influence  of  priests, 
and  yet  he  called  them  "the  thirty  or  forty  thousand 
levers  of  counter-revolution."  He  demanded  that  the 
non-jurors  be  confined  at  the  head-quarters  of  the  de- 
partments, and  forbidden,  on  pain  of  banishment,,  to 
p reach  or  to  confess.  The  orator  closed  his  monstrous 
project  of  proscription  by  calling  for  the  fire  of  Serevola, 
that  he  night  exhibit  his  love  of  country  and  liberty. 


176        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

He  would  surely  have  given  greater  proof  of  this,  if,  in- 
stead of  burning  his  hand,  he  had  never  used  it  to  write 
a  paper  which  was  destined  to  lead  to  so  many  real  suf- 
ferings of  thousands  of  men. 

The  discussion  opened  on  the  sixteenth  of  May.  For 
many  of  the  orators  the  proposed  decree  was  too  mild. 
Vergniaud  thought  himself  indulgent  in  offering  to 
continue  the  salaries  of  priests  who  would  go  into  exile 
themselves.  He  saw  fit  to  indulge  in  the  following  un- 
generous irony  :  "  I  doubt  not  that  in  Italy  they  will  be 
received  as  holy  and  persecuted  personages,  and  the 
Pope  will  be  able  to  see  in  the  present  we  make  him  of 
so  many  living  saints  how  profound  is  our  gratitude  for 
the  arms,  the  heads,  and  the  relics  of  dead  saints  with 
which,  for  so  many  centuries,  he  has  gratified  our  pious 
credulity."  The  cause  of  moderation  and  liberty  had 
only  two  champions,  Kamond  and  Moy.  The  latter, 
though  a  skeptical  priest,  and  imbued  with  the  current 
philosophy,  had  the  honor,  that  day,  of  attacking  the 
new  Constitution  of  the  Clergy  as  the  cause  of  all  the 
social  troubles.  "  You  will  have  done  nothing  for  the 
public  tranquillity,"  said  hre,  "  until  you  sweep  this  chap- 
ter of  theocracy  from  the  code  of  your  laws.  The  best 
way  to  avoid  religious  troubles,  is  to  preserve  full  relig- 
ious liberty,  and  to  render  all  religions  equal  in  the  eyes 
of  the  law."  Ramond  and  Moy  were  violently  opposed 
by  an  obscure  priest  by  the  name  of  Ichon,  who  denied 
the  title  of  worship  to  the  assemblies  of  the  unsworn 
Catholics,  and  compared  them  to  reactionary  clubs.  A 
Deputy  then  read  to  the  Assembly  the  famous  chapter 
from  Rousseau,  in  which  all  liberty  of  worship  is  sacri- 


BMfpm  and  the  Uthjn  <>f  Terror.  177 

ficed  to  the  popular  sovereignty,  and  where  the  creed  of 
the  majority  is  imposed  on  every  citizen  on  pain  of 
death.  Another  Deputy  caught  the  spirit  of  the  hour 
better  still,  and  proposed  flatly  to  convert  the  chapter 
into  a  law.  But  wherefore  this  ?  What  else  had  been 
done  for  more  than  a  year  but  simply  to  comment  on  it, 
and  put  it  into  practice  ?  The  matter  resulted  in  a  de- 
cree of  deportation  of  every  priest  who  should  be  com- 
plained against  by  twenty  active  citizens,  except  in 
cases  where  public  sentiment  opposed  it.  In  the  latter 
ease  the  accused  was  to  be  brought  to  immediate  trial. 
Such  was  the  decree  of  the  twenty-fifth  of  May,  1792. 
It  was  simply  an  aggravation  of  that  of  the  preceding 
November. 

The  war  between  France  and  the  Kings  of  Europe  had 
now  broken  out  on  the  frontiers.   The  French  cause  had 
not  at  first  prospered,  and  the  Assembly  threw  the 
blame  on  the  court,  suspecting  it  of  secret  intelligence 
with  the  enemy.    On  the  twenty-ninth  of  May  it  took 
from  the  King  his  guard  of  honor,  for  it  ordered  the 
formation  of  a  camp  of  twenty  thousand  men  in  the 
neighborhood  of  Paris,  a  veritable  revolutionary  force, 
which  was  master  of  the  executive  authority.  This 
decree,  and  that  as  to  the  deportation  of  the  priests,  were 
presented  to  Louis  XVL  at  the  same  time.    Of  course 
both  were  vetoed.    Upon  this,  Roland  read  to  him  in 
open  council  a  haughty  and  imperative  letter,  giving 
him  the  severest  lessons  of  red  republicanism.  Roland 
was  perhaps  excusable  for  disregarding  court  style, 
and  appearing  in  the  royal  presence  in  shoes  without 
buckles  j  but  it  was  surely  a  great  impropriety  for  him 


178        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

to  brave  the  King  to  his  face.  Doubtless  the  King  had 
been  strengthened  in  his  determination  to  veto  these 
laws  by  a  pamphlet  of  the  Archbishop  of  Aix.  We 
read  in  it  these  noble  words  :  "  What  is  the  crime  of 
these  fifty  thousand  Frenchmen  against  whom  banish- 
ment is  about  to  be  pronounced  ?  It  is  their  religion. 
Their  crime  is,  to  wish  not  to  perjure  themselves.  Con- 
science is  concerned ;  but  conscience  will  not  obey  de- 
crees of  every  sort."  Roland  was  dismissed  from  the 
ministry,  but  he  received  the  open  sympathy  of  the 
Assembly.  A  new  ministry,  composed  of  obscure  con- 
stitutionalists, was  formed ;  but  they  feebly  represented 
a  noble  cause,  and  consequently  played  involuntarily 
into  the  hands  of  the  extremists. 

Lafayette,  amazed  and  indignant  at  these  events, 
wrote  to  the  Assembly  from  his  post  in  the  army  an 
eloquent  letter,  in  which  he  denounced  the  influence  of 
the  clubs,  and  besought  that  the  royal  authority  and 
religious  liberty  be  respected.  It  was  but  coolly  re- 
ceived. It  was  responded  to  by  the  riot  which  on  the 
twentieth  of  June  violated  the  palace  of  the  King. 
This  insurrection  had  been  prepared  by  the  munici- 
pality of  Paris.  It  had  met  no  resistance  in  the  Assem- 
bly, and  the  royal  Majesty  had  been  odiously  insulted 
without  for  a  single  moment  receiving  serious  protec- 
tion. The  mob  which  invaded  the  Tuileries  avowed 
openly  its  design.  This  was  to  manifest  its  ill-will 
against  the  King's  veto.  The  unfortunate  prince  was 
caused  to  put  on  a  revolutionary  cap,  and  to  suffer 
odious  outrages,  for  having  protected  the  liberty  of  wor- 
ship.   Indignant  at  this,  Lafayette  hastened  to  Paris; 


JReUgum  and  the  Reign  of  Terror, 


179 


but  between  the  distrust  of  the  Court  and  the  wrath  of 
the  Jacobins  he  could  eftecj  no  understanding.  He 
returned  to  his  army  with  a  broken  heart.  The  grand 
movement  of  1VS9  was,  for  a  time,  ruined.  Liberty  had 
been  drowned  in  a  raging  flood  of  demagogism,  which 
was  grand  only  on  the  frontier,  where  in  truth  it  exhib- 
ited admirable  deeds  of  martial  heroism.  At  Paris  and 
in  the  provinces  it  was  soon  deliled  with  brutality  and 
blood.  Already  it  had  swept  away  the  most  precious 
rights  of  man,  and  its  irresistible  waves  were  now  dash- 
ing against  the  throne  of  the  outraged  Louis  XVI. 

It  was  now  that  Vergniaud  pronounced  against  tltis 
King  the  most  eloquent  oration  which  France  had 
heard  since  the  death  of  Mirabeau.  His  sole  excuse 
was  the  great  peril  which  the  foreign  invasion  threat- 
ened against  the  nation,  and  he  and  the  other  Girondists 
were  right  in  suspecting  the  Court  of  moral  complicity 
with  the  enemy.  But  was  the  real  guilt  with  the  King, 
or  with  them?  Had  not  they  done  every  thing  to 
drive  to  desperation  an  honest  and  irresolute  prince, 
from  whom  they  had  taken  away  all  means  of  legiti- 
mate defense,  and  whose  constitutional  rights  and  Chris- 
tian conscience  they  had  ruthlessly  and  violently  tram- 
pled under  foot  ?  The  orator  pleaded  for  the  vetoed 
decrees ;  charged  all  the  internal  commotions  on  the 
stubborn,  non-juring  clergy;  and  treated  the  King  as  an 
obstacle  to  the  Revolution,  and  the  occasion  of  the  in- 
vasion from  Germany.  Deputy  Dumas  responded,  with 
reason,  that  the  true  cause  of  the  troubles  was  the 
suppression  of  religious  liberty,  and  that  the  only  safe 
course  was  to  follow  tin1  polities  of  the  veto  ;  but  it  was 


180        Religion  arid  the  Reign  of  Terror, 

to  little  purpose  to  be  on  the  side  of  right  in  July,  1792. 
The  fever  was  too  high..  The  grandiose  and  poetic 
eloquence  of  the  Girondist  carried  the  day,  and,  being 
read  all  over  France,  gave  a  fatal  blow  to  the  monarchy, 
and  animated  every-where  the  persecution  of  the  non- 
juring  priests.  Bishop  Torne,  who  thus  far  had  de- 
fended the  liberty  of  worship,  now  yielded  to  the  cur- 
rent, and,  like  a  violent  Jacobin,  attacked  the  King 
because  of  his  vetoes,  and  urged  the  suspension  of  the 
constitution  in  the  name  of  the  public  safety.  Such 
views  were  but  too  strictly  put  into  practice. 

In  several  departments  the  most  iniquitous  acts  were 
brutally  inflicted  against  the  non-jurors.  The  assault 
of  the  mob  on  the  royal  palace  was  responded  to  by 
corresponding  violence  against  the  priests  throughout 
the  kingdom.  They  were  crowded  together  in  the 
prisons  of  Lyons  and  other  large  cities.  In  some  places 
they  suffered  terribly  from  want  of  air,  and  from  heat. 
From  some  provinces  they  were  lawlessly  exiled.  Not 
being  able  to  find  secure  retreats  in  the  country  many 
of  the  refractory  priests  flocked  to  Paris.  There  they 
assumed  all  sorts  of  disguises,  and  tried  to  earn  their 
bread  by  working  at  some  trade,  as  gardening  or 
bakery.  Others,  clothed  in  rags,  took  service  on  boats, 
and  engaged  in  catching  clrift-wood  in  the  Seine.  Even 
before  the  great  storm  of  September  several  priests 
were  massacred.  At  Vans,  Bravard  was  put  to  death 
for  having  refused  the  oath.  Abbot  Noir,  a  young 
priest  of  twenty-eight  years,  urged  his  father  not  to 
weep  for  him,  saying,  "  It  will  be  more  sweet  for  you 
for  your  sou  to  die  as  a  martyr  than  to  live  as  an  apos- 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  181 

tatc."  Thereupon  lie  perished  under  the  ax.  At  Bor- 
deaux an  aged  priest,  who  had  once  held  high  offices,  was 
thrown  into  a  dark,  unhealthy  dungeon.  He  repeated 
continually  the  passage  in  the  Acts  :  "  They  went  out 
from  the  council,  rejoicing  to  have  been  found  worthy 
to  suffer  outrage  for  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ."  He 
was  afterward  cruelly  executed.  Many  of  the  perse- 
cuted priests  were  heard  to  exclaim:  "These  are  the  I 
golden  days  of  the  Church ;  these  are  the  times  to  try 
the  courage  of  her  true  children." 

The  assault  of  the  mob  on  the  royal  palace  on  the 
twentieth  of  June,  led  naturally  to  the  greater  violence 
of  the  tenth  of  August.  The  suspension  of  Petion  from 
the  mayoralty  of  Paris;  by  the  King,  for  his  complicity 
in,  or  negligence  during,  the  June  riot— the  debates  re- 
sulting therefrom— his  triumphant  restoration  to  office— 
the  approach  of  the  foreign  armies— the  proclamation  of 
the  danger  of  the  country— the  arrival  of  the  bands  of 
revolutionary  ruffians  from  Marseilles — every  thing  con- 
tributed to  increase  from  hour  to  hour  the  anarchical 
fury  of  the  people  of  Paris.  It  is  now  known,  thanks 
to  reliable  documents,  that  the  municipality  of  Paris, 
with  the  Mayor  at  its  head,  took  the  initiative  in  the 
storming  of  the  Tuileries  on  the  tenth  of  August.  This 
terrible  day  bore  away  at  once  the  monarchy  and  the 
Girondist  party,  for  from  that  day  the  latter  lost  control 
of  the  Assembly.  From  September  the  Mountain  party, 
the  Terrorists,  held  supreme  sway,  though  they  hardly 
yet  numbered  a  majority.  The  Girondist*,  who  had 
opened  the  flood-gate  of  violence,  were  themselves  the 
first  to  be  sul (merged.    Another  unjust  measure,  how- 


182        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

ever,  must  be  laid  to  their  charge.  As  soon  as  the 
poor  King  was  deposed  and  out  of  the  way,  they  car- 
ried, in  the  Assembly,  another  decree,  more  oppressive 
still  than  the  former  ones,  against  the  non-conforming 
priests.  Some  days  previously  the  convents  yet  re- 
maining had  been  suppressed,  and  multitudes  of  nuns 
thrown  upon  the  streets  without  family  ties  or  shelter. 
On  Sunday,  August  17,  a  letter  was  read  in  the  Assem- 
bly announcing  that  in  one  of  the  departments  the  non- 
juring  priests  had  been  banished.  Hereupon  a  Deputy 
moved  the  application  of  a  similar  measure  to  the  whole 
of  France.  Another  proposed  on  the  twenty-third  that 
all  priests  who  had  not  taken  the  oath  be  required  to 
leave  the  country  within  fifteen  days.  Cambon  thought 
this  too  mild  still,  and  called  for  a  deqree  banishing  all 
the  non-jurors  to  the  swamps  of  Guiana;  but  Vergniaud 
and  some  others  protested  in  the  name  of  justice,  a 
name  which  it  would  have  been  better  had  they  plead 
for  sooner.  It  was  easy  to  foresee  that  just  as  1792 
had  overturned  in  great  part  the  work  of  1789,  so  1793 
was  destined  to  sweep  away  what  remained.  The 
policy  of  the  Girondists  was  to  be  pushed  to  its  legiti- 
mate excesses,  and  this  was  then-  own  severest  punish- 
ment. The  violent  measures  proposed  in  the  Assembly 
scarcely  needed  to  be  passed.  A  riotous  people  aggra- 
vated and  executed  them  only  too  faithfully  not  many 
days  afterward. 

The  Legislative  Assembly,  before  wholly  losing  con- 
trol of  the  political  movement,  realized  one  reform 
which  was  destined  to  survive  all  its  other  decrees,  for 
it  answered  the  true  wants  of  new  France.  Heretofore, 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  183 

when  the  Catholic  was  the  State  religion,  it  had  been 
necessary  to  apply  to  the  priests  for  the  verification  of 
the  chief  events  in  the  lives  of  the  citizens — such  as  birt  h, 
marriage,  and  death.  As  the  constitution  now  regarded 
all  religions  as  on  the  same  footing,  the  Assembly  de- 
creed "  that  for  the  future  the  civil  authorities  should 
receive  and  keep  the  records  of  the  births,  marriages, 
and  deaths."  The  country  was  fully  ripe  for  this 
change,  and  it  is  to  be  regretted  that  the  Legislators 
who  made  it,  themselves  so  often  denied  its  spirit,  by  con- 
founding the  spiritual  with  the  temporal,  and  by  pun- 
ishing not  only  treasonable  plottings,  which  was  their 
duty,  but  also  religious  opinion,  which  was  their  unpar- 
donable crime. 

The  terrible  massacres  of  September,  1792,  may 
rightly  be  called  the  St.  Bartholomew  of  demagogism. 
It  does  not  enter  into  our  plan  to  describe,  after  so 
many  eloquent  historians,  these  frightful  scenes.  They 
show  us  an  age,  polished  and  benevolent  on  the  surface, 
plunging  itself  into  blood  and  crime,  as  if  to  remind  us 
of  what  terrible  passions  lie  asleep  in  the  human  heart, 
and  are  ready  to  burst  into  fearful  activity  at  the  first 
call.  It  was  fondly  thought  that  the  harsh  manners 
of  the  sixteenth  century  had  been  greatly  softened  in 
all  classes,  and  that  civilization  had  sufficiently  worn 
away  the  claws  of  the  tiger.  What  surprise,  then,  to 
see  the  masses  of  Paris  rushing  out  of  the  alleys  and 
suburbs,  as  cruel,  as  athirst  for  blood,  as  the  people  of 
the  days  of  the  St.  Bartholomew  massacre,  who  had 
been  trained  by  bigoted  monks.  The  fact  is,  that  be- 
tween a  people  without  a  God  and  a  superstitious,  fanat- 


1 84        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror, 

ical  people  there  is  very  little  difference.  The  Jacobin 
of  the  atheistical  philosophy  is  the  worthy  heir  of  the 
Jacobin  of  the  sixteenth  century ;  he  is  but  the  accom- 
plice of  James  Clement,  the  monk,  who  assassinated 
Henry  III.  in  the  name  of  religion.  Instead  of  excusing 
one  crime  by  another,  and  of  justifying  a  second  by  the 
first  under  color  of  a  just  revenge,  it  is  our  duty  to 
condemn  wherever  there  is  guilt,  and  to  protest  with 
all  our  power  against  that  effemination  of  moral  and 
historical  truth  which  extenuates  and  explains  away 
stubborn  facts  that  deserve  to  be  condemned  without 
measure. 

We  will  leave  to  others  the  task  of  painting  the  city 
of  Paris,  plunged  into  stupor,  covered,  like  a  vast  prison- 
house,  by  the  law  of  "  the  suspected"  with  a  vail  of  unut- 
terable terror,  and  traversed  day  and  night  by  drunken 
bands,  who  violate  and  ransack  private  houses,  and 
thus  prepare  the  colossal  massacre  which  the  munici 
pality  had  actually  determined  upon.  As  happens  in 
all  tragic  events  which  deeply  move  society,  so  also 
here,  the  strangest  contrasts  of  human  nature  came  to 
the  surface :  women  pushing  heroism  to  its  utmost 
limits ;  barbarous  hangmen  seized  with  sudden  tender- 
ness, and  becoming  as  earnest  in  saving  as  they  had 
been  a  moment  before  in  destroying  lives,  and  then 
returning  with  equal  ardor  to  their  cruel  work ;  acts  of 
the  highest  sublimity,  as  well  as  Saturnalian  follies  such 
as  the  past  had  never  heard  of ;  devotion  of  the  purest 
order,  and  the  vilest  and  most  atrocious  selfishness; 
even  massacres  for  the  sake  of  robbery.  No  possible 
horror  was  lacking ;  and  no  description  will  ever  do 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  185 

justice  to  the  awful  reality  of  those  days  of  blood  and 
crime.  That  which  it  mostly  concerns  us  to  mention,  is 
the  fact,  that  the  massacres  of  September  were  at  first 
and  chiefly  directed  against  the  non-conforming  priests. 
One  of  the  precincts  of  Paris  voted  openly  and  in  plain 
words  the  massacre  of  the  priests.  The  resolution  ran 
as  follows  :  "  In  view  of  the  imminent  dangers  of  the 
country,  and  the  infernal  maneuvers  of  the  priests,  be 
it  resolved  that  all  the  priests  and  suspected  persons 
confined  in  the  prisons  of  Paris,  Orleans,  and  other 
cities,  be  put  to  death." 

It  is  only  necessary  to  read  the  sincere  and  moving 
account  of  Sicard  to  be  thoroughly  convinced  that  the 
non-conforming  priests  were  the  first  and  designed  vic- 
tims of  the  massacres.  This  apt  expression  of  one  of 
the  rioters  to  a  prisoner,  namely,  If  you  are  a  priest 
you  are  done  for,  is  the  best  explanation  of  those 
abominable  days.  At  a  half  dozen  different  prisons  in 
Paris  the  priests  were  butchered  en  masse,  and  the 
provinces  followed  the  example  of  the  capital.  Among 
the  many  of  the  massacred  at  Rheims,  Abbot  Paquot 
responded  thus,  to  those  who  were  pressing  him  to  take 
the  oath:  "My  choice  is  made.  I  prefer  death  to  per- 
jury ;  if  I  had  two  lives  I  might  give  one  of  them 
to  you,  but  as  I  have  but  one  I  shall  keep  it 
for  God."  The  non-juring  priests  showed  in  these 
circumstances  the  most  noble  courage.  They  refused, 
in  the  face  of  the  sword  and  ax  of  the  assassins,  to 
pronounce  against  their  conscience  an  oath  which,  in 
all  cases  would  have  saved  their  lives.    Nothing  is 

more  glorious  in  all  the  annals  of  martyrdom  than 

24 


186 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 


some  of  these  scenes.  They  combined  an  emulation  of 
holy  heroism  with  a  heart-touching  piety.  The  vener- 
able Archbishop  of  Aries,  thanking  God  for  the  duty 
of  offering  his  blood  for  his  cause — those  priests  con- 
fessing to  each  other,  and  giving  each  other  the  kiss  of 
peace  before  laying  their  heads  on  the  block — those 
answers,  kind  but  firm,  and  worthy  of  the  days  of 
Irenaeus  —  all  those  noble  manifestations  of  a  religion 
at  that  time  in  such  ill  repute — all  this  throws  a  truly 
\  celestial  light  on  the  close  of  an  incredulous  century, 
S\  and  reveals  the  presence  of  God  with  an  extraordinary 
power  at  the  very  moment  when  an  infamous  attempt 
is  about  to  be  made  to  banish  his  worship  from  society. 

/From  the  blood  of  all  the  multitudes  of  those  mas- 

1 

sacred  persons  a  warning  voice  arises.  It  says  to  all 
holders  of  civil  power,  Beware  of  violating  the  eon- 


science  !  for  it  will  surely  rise  pure  and  triumphant 
over  your  assaults,  and  leave  you  covered  with  defeat 
and  shame.  Many  of  the  priests  who  had  escaped  the 
assassins  fled  to  foreign  parts,  where  they  met  in  gen- 
eral with  a  large  hospitality,  especially  in  England. 
Many,  however,  still  remained  in  France  to  celebrate 
secretly,  and  in  the  midst  of  the  greatest  perils,  a  pro- 
scribed and  persecuted  worship.  The  Legislative  As- 
sembly, which  the  voice  of  Vergniaud  had  not  suc- 
ceeded in  awakening  out  of  the  torpor  which  had  fallen 
upon  it  since  the  commencement  of  the  massacres,  was 
now  soon  to  be  replaced  by  the  National  Convention ; 
that  is  to  say,  the  Reign  of  Terror  was  about  to  come 
in  its  legalized  and  most  fearful  form. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  187 


CHAPTER  IX 

THE  CHURCH  DURING  THE  NATIONAL  CONTENTION  UNTIL 
THE  ABOLITION  OF  THE   SALARIES  OF  THE  CLERGY. 

During  the  first  period  of  the  Convention  the  non- 
juring  priests  were  involved  in  the  general  proscription 
which  hung  over  all  those  who  were  attached  by  inter- 
est or  conviction  to  the  ancient  regime.  It  was  not 
necessary  to  take  new  measures  against  them;  it  was 
enough  to  enforce*  the  decrees  already  passed  by  the 
Legislative  Assembly.  For  this  reason  they  became 
less  a  subject  of  debate  in  the  Convention,  although 
their  positive  sufferings  were  augmenting  from  day  to 
day.  It  was  evident  from  the  first  day  that,  feeling 
certain  of  crushing  the  non-jurors,  the  Convention  was 
bej?innin£  to  look  with  disfavor  also  on  the  Constitu- 
tional  Clergy,  whom  it  regarded  as  a  sort  of  last  ram- 
part of  the  old  system  of  superstition  and  privilege, 
which  it  was  fully  determined  to  destroy,  root  and 
branch.  We  shall  see  that  when  the  time  for  striking 
the  blow  comes,  the  question  of  religion  will  again  be 
agitated  by  the  press  and  in  the  clubs.  If  we  have 
been  severe  on  the  Legislative  Assembly  we  will  not 
be  tempted  to  be  induTgent  toward  the  Convention. 
With  it  ended  emphatically,  and  for  long  years,  the 
reign  of  law.  Its  only  business  seemed  to  be  to  sanc- 
tion the  reign  of  the  clubs  and  the  faubourgs.    It  was 


1S8        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

but  the  passive  instrument  of  the  imperative  clamors  of 
a  seditious  and  cruel  populace.  I  confess  that  I  find 
nothing  to  admire  in  these  revels  of  demaowism ;  I 
hate  them  as  I  hate  the  tyranny  of  the  Cesars,  which 
was  likewise  the  reign  of  the  mob.  When  historians, 
grave  rather  than  serious,  tell  me  that  in  the  midst  of 
these  massacres  the  great  French  Revolution  was  ad- 
vancing and  establishing  itself,  I  ask,  what  kind  of  a 
shapeless  chimera  it  was  that  was  making  progress  in 
the  hands  of  Marat  and  Robespierre  in  1793,  and  after- 
ward under  the  direction  of  Xapoleon.  Surely  it  was 
not  the  regime  of  Mirabeau  and  Lafayette  for  that  pro- 
claimed right  and  liberty.  It  was  only  a  regime  of 
blind  and  terrible  force,  which  replaced  old  iniquities  by 
new  ones,  and  reintroduced  despotism  instead  of  over- 
turning it.  If  pointed  to  the  vast  portions  of  the  soil 
which  were  taken  from  the  few  and  distributed  among 
the  many  and  the  poor,  we  reply  that  this  good  work 
was  but  the  fruit  of  a  measure  taken  already  by  the 
Constituent  Assembly  in  the  memorable  night  of  Au- 
gust 4,  1789.  Surely  the  torrents  of  blood  which  had 
flowed  had  not  added  much  to  the  value  of  the  newly 
parceled  soil.  But  we  are  reminded  of  the  philanthropic 
decrees  of  the  Convention :  and  truly  it  did  well  in 
enlarging  the  hospitals ;  but  is  this  a  sufficient  excuse 
for  its  having  multiplied  the  grave-yards,  and  thrown 
into  them  daily  the  horrible  offals  of  the  scaffold  ?  It 
laid  well  the  foundations  of  out  great  establishments  of 
instruction ;  but  had  it  itself  lasted  long  it  would  have 
rendered  both  science  and  public  education  impossible, 
by  keeping  the  people  in  a  perpetual  fever  of  revolu- 


RtUgion  and  the  R>  ign  of  Terror,  189 

tion.  But  after  all  these  objections,  we  are  pointed  to 
the  heroic  resistance  against  foreign  invasion.  This,  we 
admit,  was  truly  sublime ;  but  it  was  done,  as  has  been 
well  said,  by  those  who,  saved  from  the  crimes  of  the 
interior,  escaped  to  the  frontiers  and  purified  themselves 
in  the  fire  of  the  enemy.  Let  us  admit  that  at  this 
period  of  the  Revolution  there  was  one  feature  of  real 
grandeur,  I  mean  energy ;  but  it  was  an  energy  unin- 
llueneed  by  any  moral  principle.  It  was  the  intoxica- 
tion of  a  powerful  race,  who  had  many  wrongs  to 
avenge,  and  who  were  exasperated  by  an  imminent 
peril.  Beneficent  and  sublime  in  the  face  of  the  enemy 
abroad,  the  Revolution  was  terrible  and  merciless  to- 
ward its  imagined  or  real  enemies  at  home.  This 
energy  brought  forth  miracles  of  courage  on  the  Rhine 
and  elsewhere,  but  it  reveled  in  unheard-of  crimes  at 
Paris  and  Lyons.  If  we  admire  it  without  reserve  in 
the  armies,  we  curse  it  without  reserve  in  the  clubs  and 
at  the  scafibld,  where  it  satiated  an  ever-increasin<r 
thirst  for  blood.  Let  us  not  forget,  however,  that  this 
energy  WSS,  after  all,  mere  force,  and  nothing  more, 
and  that  those  who  praise  the  Convention  because  it 
was  energetic,  will  also  praise  Napoleon  because  he  was 
strong — both  phenomena  equally  fatal  to  liberty.  Nor 
was  the  Convention  simply  energetic,  it  was  violently 
fanatical.  It  had  every  feature  of  fanaticism;  its  intol- 
erance extended  to  the  proscription  even  of  thoughts 
Slid  6m  I'm  its.  The  broad  sweep  which  was  given  to  the 
law  against  "the  suspected"  was  an  attempt  to  strike 
not  only  arts,  but  also  thoughts.  Nothing  could  be  more 
tike  the  Spanish  inquisition  than  the  revolutionary  pro- 


190        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

cedure  under  the  Convention.  The  punishment  of  death 
was  constantly  threatened,  and  executed,  on  such  as 
thought  in  such  and  such  a  manner.  Let  us  not  be 
deceived ;  this  period  of  the  Revolution  was  a  war  of 
religion,  a  war  of  opinion,  for  demagogism  became  a 
sort  of  cruel  and  ferocious  idolatry,  fully  as  intolerant 
of  schism  or  heresy  as  the  Dominican  of  the  fourteenth 
century.  Hence  the  large  proportions  of  the  struggle. 
The  Convention  practiced  also  the  ample  and  conven- 
ient morality  of  all  fanaticism :  the  end  at  which  it 
aimed  justified  in  its  eyes  all  the  means  it  employed, 
even  the  most  atrocious.  The  doctrine  of  the  "  public 
safety  "  caused  all  its  crimes ;  and  it  no  more  hesitated  to 
strike  down  its  own  members,  and  to  immolate  to  the 
clamor  of  the  clubs  its  most  illustrious  orators,  than  it 
hesitated,  after  the  mock  of  a  trial,  to  send  to  the  scaf- 
fold the  unfortunate  King.  It  did  not  judge,  it  killed ; 
and  before  killing,  outraged.  This  was  its  whole  policy, 
and  as  it  united  in  itself  all  the  powers  of  a  government, 
it  could  pursue  to  their  utmost  extreme  its  own  furious 
passions,  or  those  of  an  unbridled  demagogism,  of  which 
itself  was  the  emanation,  and  often  the  instrument. 

Despotism  alone  was  destined  to  rise  out  of  the 
weariness  and  disgust  of'-such  a  regime.  For  a  long 
time  the  hideous  figure  of  the  Convention  has  stood  as 
a  terrifying  phantom  between  modern  society  and  the 
realization  of  liberty.  We  should  dispel  this  miscon- 
ception which  deceives  the  people,  annuls  the  salutary 
lesson  so  dearly  paid  for,  and  is  made  to  excuse  all  sorts 
of  political  reaction.  Only  render  liberty  hideous,  and 
you  have  well  merited  of  all  despotisms.    Now  this  is 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  191 

precisely  what  those  do  who  excuse  the  crimes  of  the 
Revolution,  and  compose  for  the  public  a  sort  of  demo- 
cratic martyrology,  made  up  of  names  which,  though 
terrible,  are  none  the  less  infamous.  I  admit  that  in 
the  Convention  the  Girondists  change  their  course ;  but 
they  can  only  be  pardoned  from  the  moment  when, 
abandoning  their  own  principles,  they  come  to  the 
defense  of  the  right  which  for  so  long  they  had  trampled 
under  foot.  At  the  trial  of  the  King  the  conduct  of 
the  most  .of  them  is  without  courage.  They  lack  the 
boldness  to  save  him  openly  ;  they  stop  at  a  half-way 
measure,  and  finally  sacrifice  him  to  their  parliamentary 
influence.  If  the  whole  party  had  spoken  as  Lanjuinais 
the  Convention  would  not  have  passed  out  of  their 
hands  ;  they  could  have  controlled  it.  The  true  way  to 
triumph  over  Robespierre  was  not  to  hurl  against  him 
eloquent  philippics,  but  to  arrest  him  at  once  by  a  de- 
termined vote,  the'  very  day  when  he  presumed  to  de- 
clare that  it  was  the  duty  of  the  nation  not  to  judge  the 
King,  but  to  kill  him.  Our  heart  is  entirely  with  the 
Girondists  when  they  struggle  with  the  eloquence  of 
Vergniaud,  the  energy  of  Guadet,  and  the  just  indigna- 
tion of  Ducos,  against  the  pressure  of  the  lawless  clubs, 
and  against  that  abominable  municipality  of  Paris 
which,  since  the  September  massacres,  is  little  else  than 
a  gang  of  assassins;  still  we  cannot  forget  that  these 
same  men,  under  the  Legislative  Assembly,  had  had 
recourse  to  this  dangerous  force  of  insurrection,  and 
that  the  austere  Petion  favored  the  riot  of  August  10. 
It  is  only  since  the  thirty-first  of  May,  1793,  that  our 
sympathies  are  wholly  with  the  Girondists.    They  have 


192        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

fallen  victims  to  arbitrary  principles  to  which  they  them- 
selves had  too  much  resorted.  Proscribed  as  a  body, 
those  who  could  not  escape  fell  under  the  ax  of  the 
executioner.  The  sudden  loss  of  so  much  youth,  talent, 
and  noble  though  misguided  zeal,  will  always  be  a  source 
of  grief  to  France. 

But  if  we  except  a  few  names,  such  as  the  honest 
Carnot,  (whose  silence,  however,  in  the  face  of  so  many 
wrongs  cannot  be  excused,)  what  one  of  all  the  radical 
left  which  now  controlled  the  Convention  can  be  pro- 
posed as  an  object  of  admiration  ?  Danton  was  the  in- 
carnation of  the  audacity  which  he  preached,  but  he 
could  never  wash  his  hands  of  the  blood  of  the  Septem- 
ber massacres.  Camille  Desmoulins  is  ever  the  terrible 
joker  whose  pleasantry  kills,  and  a  final  gleam  of  cou- 
rageous pity  can  scarcely  undo  the  injustice  of  his  life. 
Robespierre,  when  closely  studied,  will  always  appear 
as  one  of  the  worst  enemies  which  liberty  ever  had. 
This  sophistical  tribune  never  loses  an  opportunity  of 
offering  incense  to  a  false  popular  sovereignty,  and  of 
sacrificing  to  it  all  the  rights  which  make  men  free.  I 
know  of  nothing  more  hideous  .than  the  kind  of  frater- 
nity which  he  proclaims,  in  speeches  that  smell  both  of 
the  oil  and  of  blood.  He  rises  only  upon  the  dead 
bodies  of  his  opponents,  and  he  never  forgets  that  they 
are  his  rivals.  This  mixture  of  the  proconsul  and  the 
soured  academician  is  contemptible.  His  ideas  are  run 
mad ;  they  are  the  reduction  to  the  absurd  of  Rous- 
seau's Gontrat  Social.  He  is  none  the  less  odious  for 
bis  austerity — for  the  plain  wooden  writing-desk  of  his 
study;  for,  the  speeches  there  written  were  to  bring 


Jed i (j ion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  193 

beads  to  the  executioner's  block.  As  to  Marat,*  "all 
dripping  with  gall,  with  calumny,  and  blood,"  if  there 
was  once  a  French  Academy  to  listen^to  him,  and  a 
people  to  bear  him  in  triumph,  it  is  simply  the  shame  ca 
our  history.  Neither  the  fine  figure  of  St.  Just,  the 
calm  hangman,  nor  the  sentimental  Barrere,  f  with  his 
two  speeches  in  his  pocket,  ready  to  speak  whichever 
way  the  popular  wind  should  blow,  nor  the  elegance  of 
Garat,  nor  the  bodily  infirmities  of  Couthou,  have  any 
attraction  for  me.  I  ask,  what  liberty  it  is  which  the 
Convention  did  not  resolutely,  cruelly,  and,  in  the  end, 
uselessly,  trample  under  foot  ?  I  ask,  what  one  of  the 
principles  of  1789  did  it  not  violate  and  suppress,  from 
the  liberty  of  assemblage  and  of  the  press  to  the  liberty 
of  worship  ?  Did  it  not  push  to  the  extreme  the  system 
of  centralization,  so  that  when  Napoleon  came  to  the 
mastery  he  found,  ready  to  his  hand  and  fully  mounted, 
the  most  perfect  machine  of  despotism?  Yergniaud, 
whose  eyes  were  opened  too  late,  had  admirably  de- 
fined the  liberalism  of  the  Convention.  "  It  said  to  all," 
so  runs  his  language,  "  You  are  free,  but  think  as  we 
think  on  questions  of  politics,  or  we  will  denounce  you 
to  the  vengeance  of  the  people.  You  are  free,  but  bow 
your  head  to  the  idol  which  we  worship,  or  we  will  de- 
nounce you  to  the  vengeance  of  the  people.  You  are 
free,  but  unite  with  us  in  persecuting  those  whose  pro- 
bity and  talents  we  fear,  or  we  will  denounce  you  to 
the  vengeance  of  the  people."  Surely  one  might  well 
fear  that,  like  Saturn,  the  Revolution  would  devour  its 

•  See  Appendix,  note  23.  f  Ibid.,  note  24. 

25 


194        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 


own  children,  and  engender  in  the  end  only  despotism, 
with  all  the  accompanying  evils. 

Before  returning  to  the  history  of  the  Church  in  these 
stormy  times,  let  us  rehearse  the  principal  measures  ■ 
adopted  by  the  Convention  for  crushing  all  opposition. 
After  the  execution  of  the  King,  January  21,  1793, 
there  had  been  created,  March  9,  in  the  midst  of  the 
commencing  dissensions  in  the  Assembly  between  the 
Girondists  -and  the  Mountainists,  a  terrible  instrument 
of  injustice,  namely,  a  revolutionary  tribunal,  against 
whose  decisions  there  was  no  appeal.  This  was  denned 
by  Lanjuinais  as  "  a  decree  which  was  monstrous  from 
the  circumstances  of  the  nation,  monstrous  in  its  viola- 
tion of  all  the  rights  of  man,  and  monstrous  by  the 
abominable  irregularity .  of  not  admitting  appeal  in 
criminal  cases."  The  courageous  Deputy  asked  in  vain 
that,  at  furthest,  this  terrible  tribunal  be  allowed  only 
in  the  department  of  the  capital ;  for  it  was  soon  estab- 
lished all  over  France.  It  was  simply  a'  machine  ol 
.  irresistible  and  murderous  proscription ;  for  nothing  was 
more  derisive  than  the  picked  and  sordid  jury  which 
was  granted,  but  which  was  not  even  allowed  to  delib- 
erate with  closed  doors.  The  Committee  of  Public 
Safety  had  been  instituted,  May  22,  1793,  at  the  de 
mand  of  the  rash  Girondist  Isnard.  The  party  of  the 
Girondists  had  been  expelled  from  the  Convention  and 
outlawed  on  the  second  of  June,  under  the  pressure  of 
successive  riots  which  had  convulsed  Paris.  The  radical 
left  were  then  masters  of  the  Convention,  and  had  con- 
trol of  the  Committee  of  Public  Safety,  which  assured 
in  their  hands  absolute  power,  and  coveied  all  their 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  195 

measures  with  a  cloak  of  legality.  With  these  two 
formidable  instruments,  this  Committee  and  the  Revolu- 
tionary Tribunal,  they  could  speedily  crush  all  opposi- 
tion whatever.  The  refractory  clergy  were  of  course 
the  first  to  fall  under  the  stroke  of  proscription. 

The  disposition  of  the  Convention  in  regard  to  relig- 
ion was  similar  to  that  of  the  Legislative  Assembly.  It 
contained  a  good  number  of  declared  Atheists,  who  de- 
sired to  efface  all  remains  of  the  ancient  beliefs.  The 
sole  representatives  of  Christianity  were  a  few  lay  and 
clerical  Jansenists,  and  some  Constitutional  Bishops,  of 
whom  several  apostatized  openly  and  shamelessly  as 
soon  as  the  hour  of  trial  arrived.  The  disciples  of 
Rousseau  stuck  to  their  sentimental  Deism,  which  was 
in  perfect  accord  with  intolerance.  Robespierre  was 
opposed  to  shameless  moral  impropiety,  and  lost  no  op- 
portunity of  rendering  homage  to  the  Supreme  Being. 
The  Girondists,  with  one  or  two  exceptions,  were  fer- 
vent disciples  of  the  philosophy  of  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury, and  some  of  them  professed  a  sort  of  irreverent 
disdain  for  all  positive  religion  whatever.  Such  was 
Isnard,  who  denied  any  other  God  than  the  law.  These 
sentiments  were  boldly  expressed  in  one  of  the  first 
debates  of  the  Convention.  A  proposition  to  exclude 
religious  instruction  from  the  public  schools  had  been 
opposed  by  Maillane,  a  Catholic,  whereupon  Dupont,  a 
Girondist,  responded  with  great  earnestness,  and  pro- 
fessed an  ardent  hatred  of  Christianity.  "  What,"  said 
he,  "  shall  thrones  be  overturned,  scepters  broken,  and 
kings  executed,  and  yet  the  altars  of  the  gods  remain 
untouched?    When  the  thrones  are  overturned  these 


196        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

altars  are  left  naked,  and  without  support.  Do  you 
think,  citizen  legislators,  to  base  the  republic  on  any- 
other  altar  than  that  of  the  country  ?  Xature  and  rea- 
son, these  are  the  gods  of  man.  These  are  our  gods." 
Dupont  did  not  need  after  this  to  assert  that  he  was  an 
Atheist.  He  concluded  by  asking  for  the  abolition  of 
all  tyranny,  and  the  foundation  of  true  liberty  on  the 
negation  of  all  prejudices.  The  French,  according  to 
him,  would  be  free  only  when  they  had  fully  thrown  off 
the  yoke  of  priests,  and  were  able  to  die  like  d'Alem- 
bert,  who  wished  only  the  philosopher  Condorcet  *  to 
close  his  eyes.  This  discourse  provoked,  it  is  true,  some 
murmurs,  but  it  pleased  the  majority  of  the  Convention. 
Ducos  expressed  the  same  opinions  in  more  moderate 
language,  saying  that  the  return  of  prejudices  was  the 
true  counter-revolution.  One  of  his  reasons  for  exclud- 
ing religious  instruction  from  the  schools  may  be  very 
easily  reconciled  with  a  respect  for  religion,  for  he  said 
that  as  the  schools  should  be  for  citizens  of  different 
Churches  without  distinction,  the  intervention  of  a  priest 
would  always  be  offensive  to  those  of  a  religion  to 
which  he  did  not  belong.  But  was  it  needful  for  the 
orator  to  go  on  and  insult  religion  itself  ?  "  The  first 
condition,"  said  he,  "  of  public  instruction  is  to  teach 
nothing  but  truth,  and  this  alone  is  enough  to  exclude 
the  clergy.  For  my  part,  I  confess  I  would  rather  trust 
them  with  the  finances  of  the  nation  than  with  the  edu- 
cation of  the  youth.  I  would  rather  ruin  the  public 
treasury  than  pervert  and  corrupt  the  public  spirit.  I 
will  cite  as  appropriate  here  the  story  which  Plutarch 
*  See  Appendix,  note  25. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  197 

relates  of  a  flute-player,  who  was  paid  simply  for  play- 
ing, and^doubly  for  keeping  silence,  for  the  reason  that 
he  played  false."  Such  were  the  sentiments  of  the 
Girondists  on  the  subject  of  religion.  It  may  easily  be 
inferred  that  they  would  have  little  hesitation  about 
violating  the  liberty  of  worship.  The  Constitutional 
Clergy  could  readily  foresee  that  the  day  of  trial  would 
finally  come  for  them  also,  for  it  was  against  religion 
itself  that  the  hostility  was  directed. 

By  such  manifestations,  however,  the  Convention  of- 
fended against  public  opinion  not  only  in  the  West  and 
South,  but  also  in  Paris  itself.  Fickle  and  ardent,  the 
working  class  of  this  great  city  passed  for  the  moment 
from  their  hatred  of  the  clergy  to  a  strange  attachment 
for  the  ancient  rites  of  the  Church.  Several  wards 
complained  bitterly  against  a  decree  of  the  municipality 
passed  in  December,  1792,  forbidding  the  celebration  of 
the  midnight  mass.  The  movement  was  so  large  that 
recourse  was  had  to  a  pecuniary  reward  for  such  as 
would  abstain  from  this  mass.  An  attempt  to  abolish 
a  festival  resulted  only  in  a  great  scandal.  Some 
women  attempted  to  hang  a  man,  whom  they  blamed 
for  this  attempt.  The  festival  of  St.  Genevieve  was 
celebrated  with  great  enthusiasm  by  a  vast  concourse 
of  people.  Many  hundreds  could  not  get  inside  of  that 
church  which,  next  year,  was  to  be  disgraced  by  the 
revels  of  the  worship  of  reason.  But  it  required  the 
stimulus  of  demagogism  and  terror  to  effect  this  change 
in  popular  opinion.  Impiety  descended  from  the  higher 
to  the  lower  classes,  rather  than  the  contrary.  And  we 
fchall  see  that  when  calm  was  restored  in  the  govern- 


198        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror, 


ment  the  Catholic  worship  re-established  itself  with  an 
astonishing  facility. 

During  this  period  of  the  Revolution  religious  perse-  * 
cution  did  not  cease  for  a  single  moment.    It  tended  to 
reach  all  clergymen  indiscriminately,  but  the  non-jurors 
had  for  a  long  time  the  honor  of  the  greatest  sufferings. 
The  formula  of  the  oath  had  been  modified  since  the 
abolition  of  royalty  so  as  to  read  simply,  to  liberty  and 
to  equality ;  but  this  was  very  little  more  acceptable 
than  that  which  required  a  formal  acceptation  of  the 
new  Constitution  of  the  Clergy,  since  it  involved  an 
approval  of  the  whole  system  of  things  which  the  Con- 
vention had  founded  on  the  immolation  of  the  King, 
and  supported  by  the  terrible  laws  of  proscription. 
The  conscience  was  alarmed  at  such  an  approval.  The 
number  of  non-juring  priests  did  not  diminish,  and  their 
sufferings  continually  increased.     The  revolts  of  La 
Vendee   and  Lyons   occasioned   increased  harshness 
against  them.    They  were  regarded  as  the  chief  agents 
of  counter-revolution  at  home  and  abroad.    A  severe 
decree  was  made  against  such  emigrants  as  should  be 
caught  on  French  soil,  and  domiciliary  visits  were  au- 
thorized in  all  houses  where  they  might  be  suspected  of 
lurking.    In  March,  1793,  it  was  decreed  that  whoever 
recognized  a  returned  emigrant  or  priest  might  arrest 
and  bring  him  to  the  nearest  prison  to  be  executed  in 
the  next  twenty-four  hours.    The  priests  who  had  left 
the  country  fell  under  the  terrible  stroke  of  the  law 
against  emigrants,  which  declared  them  banished  for- 
ever, dead  politically,  and  as  having  forfeited  to  the 
State  all  their  property.    The  more  the  country  was 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  190 

threatened  by  invasion  from  abroad,  and  sedition  in  the 
interior,  the  more  eruel  and  barbarous  was  the  treat- 
ment of  the  non-juring  priests. 

The  Legislative  Assembly  had  decreed  their  extradi- 
tion, and  this  was  the  occasion  of  several  murders.  The 
mob,  infuriated  by  the  clubs,  attacked  them  on  their  pas- 
sage, demanded  of  them  the  oath,  and  too  often  massa- 
cred them  on  the  spot  for  their  firm  and  heroic  refusal. 
Sometimes  they  were  robbed  before  embarkation.  Can- 
non shot  were  even  fired  on  the  ships  which  were  bear- 
ing them  away.     This  happened  at  Havre,  Dieppe, 
Rouen,  and  elsewhere.    The  journey  of  the  priests  to 
the  place  of  imprisonment  until  they  could  be  trans- 
ported was  a  time  of  continued  suffering.    In  March, 
1793,  a  large  company  were  sent  to  Nantes.    On  ar- 
riving in  this  city  the  unfortunate  men  were  thrown 
pell-mell  upon  a  boat,  where  they  received  the  worst  of 
treatment,  and  would  have  died  of  starvation  but  for 
the  charity  of  certain  citizens.    The  gangrene  broke 
out  among  them,  and  their  sole  consolation  consisted  in 
taking  with  each  other  the  communion  twice  a  day. 
Finally  they  were  conducted  to  a  sea-port,  but  not  till 
after  death  had  greatly  thinned  their  ranks.    The  Con- 
vention had  decreed  the  deportation  of  the  non-jurors 
to  Guiana.    In  July,  1793,  Danton  asked  a  change  in 
the  order.    "We  ought  not,"  said  he,  "to  avenge  our- 
Mitttt  for  the  poison  we  have  received  from  America  by 
sending  thither  another  poison  not  less  mortal.    It  is  in 
the  territory  of  the  Holy  Father  that  this  sacerdotal 
mephitism  should  be  concentrated."    Lacroix  proposed 
that  the  priests  should  be  cast  into  prison,  and  made  to 


200        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

gain  their  bread  by  bard  labor;  but  Robespierre  in- 
sisted on  the  execution  of  the  "wise  decree"  which 
would  free  France  from  the  contagious  pestilence  of  fanat- 
ical priests.  He  looked  upon  them  as  wild  beasts,  which 
the  least  change  in  the  political  tide  might  let  loose  on 
the  vitals  of  the  nation.  The  matter  was  referred  to  a 
committee,  but  lack  of  money  rendered  the  deportation 
impossible.  The  refractory  priests  were  crowded  upon 
boats,  or  sent  en  masse  to  the  scaffold.  At  Lyons,  Collot 
d'Herbois  *  condemned  to  death  one  hundred  and  twenty 
of  them  in  a  single  day.  At  Arras,  Lebon  f  shed  their 
blood  in  torrents,  and  large  numbers  of  them  were 
drowned  at  Nantes.  The  Revolution  was  equally  cruel 
toward  the  nuns.  A  large  number  of  them,  who  had 
/  been  confined  in  a  single  prison,  responded  nobly  in 
these  words  to  their  persecutors,  who  charged  them 
with  fanaticism  :  "  It  is  fanatics  who  slaughter  and  kill, 
but  we  pray  for  such."  "You  shall  be  sent  abroad." 
"Wherever  we  are  sent  we  will  pray."  "Whither 
would  you  prefer  to  be  sent  ?  "  "  Where  there  are  the 
most  of  suffering  ones  to  console,  and  there  are  nowhere 
more  than  in  France."  "  If  you  remain  here  it  is  to 
die."  "  Then  we  will  die."  These  pious  women  sang 
aloud,  and  joyfully,  sacred  hymns  at  the  foot  of  the 
scaffold.  It  required  a  courage  fully  equal  to  that  of  the 
young  volunteers  who  marched  out  to  death  at  the  notes 
of  the  Marseillaise.  Calamities  like  these  exalt  human 
nature,  and  render  it  either  atrocious  or  sublime.  This 
epoch  engendered  both  heroism  and  crime  ;  the  heroism 
was  found  in  both  parties.  Often  simple  lay  Christians 
*See  Appendix,  note  26.  f  Ibid.,  note  27. 


Religion  and  the.  Reign  of  Terror.  201 

rivaled  the  courage  of  the  priests  and  nuns.    This  was 
seen  in  a  company  who  were  once  attending  the  pro- 
scribed worship,  in  a  cavern.    Some  one  announced  that 
the  soldiers  of  the  republic  could  hear  the  songs  ofN 
praise.    The  people  simply  said  to  the  priest:  "That 
makes  no  difference,  tititor"  and  the  song  continued. 
To  sing  a  hymn  in  such  circumstances  required  as  much 
courage  as  to  serve  a  cannon  under  the  fire  of  the  enemy.j 
During  the  reign  of  terror  the  Convention  had  very 
little  occasion  to  deal  theoretically  with  the  rights  of 
conscience.    It  is  true,  it  devoted  some  attention  to  the 
subject  on  the  occasion  of  the  Declaration  of  Rights 
which  was  to  preface  the  new  constitution  it  was  pre- 
paring for  France.    Condorcet  had  prepared  the  first 
sketch  of  this  ultra-democratic  document.    It  rejected 
with  disdain  the  idea  of  an  Upper  House,  as  well  as  every 
thing  else  which  could  impose  a  check  or  act  as  a  bal- 
ance of  power  in  the  government.    The  members  of  the 
Assembly,  as  well  as  all  other  officers  of  the  nation 
were  to  spring  from  the  votes  of  the  primary  assemblies' 
Every  citizen  who  could  get  fifty  others  to  second  his 
wish  had  the  right  to  convene  special  primary  assem- 
blies.   The  legislative  and  the  executive  powers,  as  they 
sprang  from  the  same  source,  were  co-ordinate,  and  con- 
sututed  a  dangerous  duality.    Theoretically,  the  Decla- 
ration of  Rights  consecrated  all  just  principles;  but 
practically,  these  abstractions  amounted  to  nothing 
The  discussion  of  these  mere  theories  gave  occasion  to 
several  eccentric  speeches,  which  would  be  possible  only 
in  a  time  of  extreme  enthusiasm.    Anacharsis  Clootz  * 

*  See  Appendix,  note  28. 
26 


202        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

was  allowed  to  develop  in  the  Convention  his  fantas- 
tical ideas  as  to  the  divinity  of  the  human  race  in  general, 
and  of  the  French  people  in  particular.  "  The  words 
French  and  universal,"  said  Clootz,  "  have  become  more 
truly  synonymous  than  the  names  of  Christian  and 
Catholic.  I  hold  that  you  have  a  very  inadequate  idea 
of  the  nature  of  the  sans-culottes  if  you  admit  that 
there  is  a  divine  or  creative  Being.  Whoever  has  the 
weakness  to  believe  in  God  is  incapable  of  believing  in 
the  divinity  of  the  human  race,  the  only  sovereign." 
Despite  his  enthusiasm  for  the  name  of  Frenchman,  he 
proposed  to  substitute  for  it  that  of  German,  as  being 
more  comprehensive,  and  embracing  a  whole  family  of 
nations.  He  proposed  seriously  that  the  Convention 
should  adopt  his  ideas,  and  decree  that  every  indi- 
vidual and  every  society  who  should  accept  them 
should  have  right  of  membership  in  the  republic  of  men, 
of  Germans,  and  of  Universals.  And  this  speech  of 
Clootz  was  listened  to  without  laughter !  But.  why 
should  we  be  astonished?  We  have  witnessed  in  our 
own  day  the  reappearance  of  this  same  apotheosis  of  the 
race,  with  a  mysticism  which  far  surpasses  that  of  the 
"  orator  of  the  human  race." 

The  constitution  drawn  up  by  Condorcet  did  not  sur- 
vive the  fall  of  the  Girondists.  Robespierre  concocted 
a  new  one,  which,  passing  over  in  silence  the  guarantees 
of  the  former,  deified  not  the  human  race  in  general,  but 
the  multitude.  His  speech,  on  presenting  it,  abounded 
from  beginning  to  end  with  the  most  abject  flattery  of 
the  masses,  whom  he  declared  to  be  impeccable  and  in- 
fallible.   "  Lay  down  as  a  first  principle,"  said  he,  "  that 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  203 

the  people  are  good,  but  that  their  delegates  are  cor- 
ruptible, and  that  it  is  in  the  virtue  and  sovereignty  of 
the  people  that  we  must  seek  for  a  preservative  against 
the  vices  and  despotism  of  the  government."  Such  a 
plan  was  a  suppression  of  the  representative  system,  or, 
at  least,  its  entire  subordination  to  the  primary  meet- 
ings of  the  populace.  Robespierre  desired  that  the  Na- 
tional Legislature  should  deliberate  in  the  presence  of 
the  whole  peoj;>le,  though  it  seems  that  the  clamors  of 
the  galleries  ought  to  have  sufficed  to  turn  him  from 
such  a  thought.  His  project  was  an  assault  on  all  real 
liberties,  and  especially  on  the  right  of  property,  which 
he  denned  as  the  power  to  possess  what  the  law  grants. 
This  strange  constitution  was  presented  on  the  tenth, 
and  adopted  on  the  twenty-third  of  June,  1793.  Surely 
it  was  the  lamest  constitution  ever  given  to  a  great 
people.  However,  it  was  destined  never  to  be  put 
into  force.  There  is  one  feature  of  it  which  has 
met  with  much  praise:  I  mean  its  so-called  frater- 
nal, social,  and  humanitarian  color ;  and  it  does,  in 
fact  abound  in  that  pretentious  sentimentality  which 
never  and  nowhere  better  blossomed  than  at  the  foot  of 
the  scaffold.  Its  conclusion  has  been  thought  to  be 
admirable,  namely :  "  The  French  republic  honors  loyal- 
ty, courage,  old  age,  filial  piety,  and  misfortune.  It 
puts  the  treasure  of  its  constitution  under  the  guardian- 
ship of  all  the  virtues.-'  However,  the  most  sacred  of 
these  virtues  seems  to  have  been  the  right  of  insurrec- 
tion, at  least  if  we  may  judge  from  the  practice  of  the 
times.  And  in  fact  this  was  the  only  resource  left  to 
liberty ;  for  the  citizen  was  not  protected  effectually  in  a 


204        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

single  one  of  his  rights.  He  was  delivered  over  to  the 
despotism  of  an  irresponsible  Assembly,  which  had  no 
other  check  than  the  clubs  of  Paris.  All  the  govern- 
mental powers  were  in  its  hands;  the  instrument  of 
tyranny  was  perfect. 

If  we  examine  what  concerns  the  liberty  of  worship 
in  these  two  drafts  of  constitutions,  we  will  find  th^t  of 
Condorcet  little  better  than  that  of  Robespierre,  as  re- 
cast by  Herault  de  Sechelles.    The  debates  showed  as 
little  respect  for  this  sacred  right  among  the  Girondists 
as  among  the  Terrorists  proper.    In  May  an  obscure 
Deputy  had  moved  that  the  article  in  the  constitution 
of  Condorcet  which  conceded  the  rights  of  conscience 
should  be  stricken  out,  on  the  ground,  that  whereas  the 
subjective  liberty  of  the  conscience  could  never  be  in- 
terfered with,  the  objective  practice  of  worship  would 
infallibly  conflict  with  the  spirit  of  an  age  which  was 
soon  to  have  no  other  worship  than  that  of  liberty  and 
public  morality.    And  Vergniaud  supported  the  motion. 
To  hear  him,  the  days  of  intolerance  were  forever  past ; 
a  strange  position  at  a  time  when  an  unmerciful  perse- 
cution was  raging  all  over  the  land !    Danton  was  of 
the  same  mind,  and  thundered  against  superstition,  and 
in  favor  of  fresh  persecution.    According  to  him  the 
surest  sign  of  progress  in  religious  liberty  was  the 
hatred  of  the  populace  against  the  clergy.    The  priests 
are  persecuted,  therefore  religious  liberty  is  complete  ; 
a  sophism  which  has  often  reappeared  in  France. 

The  discussion  of  the  right  of  worship  came  up  again 
on  the  eighteenth  of  June.  Barrere  demanded  that 
liberty  of  worship  be  formally  inserted  in  the  Declara- 


4 


r 

Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  205 

tion  of  Rights,  and  cited  with  approval  the  example  of 
the  thirteen  States  of  North  America.  But  Robespierre 
opposed  the  motion  with  great  rancor.  "  I  fear,"  said 
he,  "  that  conspirators  may  find  in  the  article  which 
concedes  liberty  of  worship,  the  means  of  overturning 
the  public  liberty.  I  fear  that  counter-revolutionists 
will,  disguise  their  attempts  under  religious  forms.  It 
would  be  a  hypocritical  mask  in  which  conspirators 
would  assault  liberty."  At  furthest,  however,  these 
conspirators,  whatever  they  did,  would  not  be  able 
more  fatally  and  perfidiously  to  stab  liberty  than  did 
this  austere  tribune,  who  himself  also  wore  a  hypocriti- 
cal mask.  Despite  his  efforts,  the  right  of  worship  re- 
mained in  the  Constitution  ;  but  of  course  it  remained  a 
dead  letter,  at  a  time  when  the  man  who  had  combated 
it  was  omnipotent  in  France. 

Some  months  previously  a  proposition  had  been  made 
by  Cambon,*  in  a  committee  of  financej  which,  had  it 
been  adopted,  would  have  prevented  many  evils.  It 
was,  to  teave  every  Church  to  pay  for  its  own  worship. 
But  the  motion  was  opposed.  Danton,  the  Terrorist, 
said :  "  It  has  been  declared  that  the  priests  should  not 
be  salaried  out  of  the  public  treasury.  Appeal  has  been 
made  to  philosophical  ideas  which  are  dear  to  me,  for  I 
recognize  no  other  God  than  the  God  of  the  universe, 
no  other  worship  than  that  of  reason  and  liberty ;  but 
man,  unhappy  in  the  lot  of  life,  seeks  after  eternal  en- 
joyments, and  imagines  that  in  another  life  his  joys  will 
be  multiplied  in  proportion  to  his  miseries  in  this. 
After  you  shall  have  instructed  and  ripened  the  people 
*  See  Appendix,  note  29. 


206        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

for  some  time,  then  it  will  be  time  to  speak  to  them  of 
morals  and  philosophy ;  but  until  then  it  is  barbarous, 
it  is  a  crime,  to  take  from  the  people  the  priests  in  whom 
they  yet  find  some  consolation.  It  would,  therefore,  be 
wise,  I  think,  for  the  Convention  to  publish  to  the  peo- 
ple an  address,  declaring  that  it  has  no  wish  to  destroy 
but  only  to  perfect,  and  that  if  it  pursues  fanaticism  it 
is  only  because  it  wishes  liberty  of  religious  opinions." 
But  Danton  was  greatly  mistaken  in  imagining  that 
Cambon's  project  of  withholding  the  salaries  of  the 
priests  would  have  quickly  crippled  Christianity.  Had 
it  been  done  respectfully,  and  had  liberty  of  worship 
been  honestly  guaranteed,  the  Revolution  would  have 
been  saved.  Robespierre  was  of  the  same  opinion  as 
Danton.  The  piece  of  rhetoric  in  which  he  defends  his 
position  is  perhaps  the  best  we  have  from  his  pen,  for 
it  was  written  with  the  most  thorough  conviction.  The 
separation  of  Church  and  State  will  always  be  a  stum- 
bling-block to  the  consistent  disciples  of  Rousseau. 
Robespierre  begins  by  expressing  his  disdain  for  the 
superstitions  of  the  clergy.  "I  am,"  says  he,  "no 
fonder  than  others  of  the  power  of  the  priests.  It  is 
one  more  added  to  the  chains  of  humanity;  but  it  is  an 
invisible  chain  acting  on  the  soul,  and  reason  alone  can 
break  it.  The  lawgiver  may  aid  reason,  but  must  not 
take  its  place  or  anticipate  it."  Taking  a  rapid  survey 
of  the  country,  he  rejoiced  in  the  progress  which  phi- 
losophy had  already  made.  "  Even  those  who  remain 
attached  to  Christianity,"  said  he,  "if  we  except  the 
counter-revolutionists,  teach  now  only  the  imposing 
dogmas  which  come  to  the  support  of  the  morality,  the 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Tewor.  207 

virtue,  and  equality  which  were  formerly  taught  by  the 
Son  of  Mary  to  his  Jewish  fellow-citizens."  Thus,  ac- 
cording to  Robespierre,  France  was  already  very  near 
to  that  religion  without  mysteries,  to  that  rational  wor- 
ship of  the  Supreme  Being,  which  was  the  ideal  of 
Rousseau.  If  there  was  yet  mingled  with  this  high 
philosophy  an  element  of  superstition,  so  much  the  bet- 
ter, for  it  rendered  the  system  palatable  to  the  people. 
He  referred  with  approval  to  the  policy  of  ancient  legis- 
lators in  assuming  for  their  systems  the  sanction  of 
Heaven.  But  he  forgot  that  from  the  time  that  the 
Roman  augurs  laughed,  not  secretly,  as  in  the  time  of 
Cicero,  but  openly,  and  in  the  market-places,  this  pious 
trickery  of  philosophy  to  impose  on  the  people,  had  very 
little  success.  Religion  will  have  nothing  to  do  with  the 
hypocritical  respect  of  politicians  who  support  it  from 
motives  of  State.  Robespierre  lays  here  the  foundation 
of  the  Concordat  system  of  Napoleon,  who  was  in  this 
respect  his  faithful  disciple.  He  was  likewise  the 
teacher  of  Napoleon  in  that  part  of  his  writings  which 
describes  the  dangers,  to  a  strongly  centralized  govern- 
ment, of  the  independence  of  the  Church  from  the 
State.  "  What  could  be  more  fatal  to  the  public  tran- 
quillity," asked  he,  with  all  the  sincerity  of  a  partisan  of 
despotic  sovereignty,  "  than  the  realization  of  this 
theory  of  individual  worship  ?  You  seem  to  fear  the 
influence  of  the  priests,  but  your  plan  would  increase  it; 
for  as  soon  as  they  cease  to  be  priests  of  the  public  they 
would  become  those  of  individuals,  and  have  with  the 
same  the  most  intimate  relations."  He  then  proceeded 
to  picture  to  the  alarmed  Jacobins  the  spectacle  of  in- 


208        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 


dividual  liberty  taking  advantage  of  the  separation  of 
Church  and  Sta^e,  and  forming  minorities  into  parties, 
to  resist  the  sway  of  the  majority.  And  he  was  not 
mistaken.  The  system  of  a  non-salaried  Church  is  in 
fact  fatal  to  tyranny.  Robespierre  opposed,  as  was  his 
custom,  the  poor  to  the  rich,  declaring  that  as  the  poor 
are  the  more  religious,  it  would  be  a  great  hardship  to 
them  not  to  salary  the  Church.  The  only  one  of  his 
arguments  which  had  weight,  was  drawn  from  the  pub- 
lic faith  which  had  been  pledged  to  the  system  of  sal- 
aries ;  but  not  to  mention  that  this  faith  had  already 
been  broken  in  the  case  of  the  non-jurors,  it  would  have 
been  easy  to  remunerate  the  priests  individually  so  far 
as  to  satisfy  the  claims  of  justice,  and  yet  leave  the 
Church  without  salary  from  the  State.  It  was  impor- 
tant for  our  purpose  to  signalize  the  hostility  of  Robes- 
pierre to  the  separation  of  Church  and  State.  It  is  a 
great  honor  for  this  principle,  to  have  had  for  an  adver- 
sary such  a  man,  and  for  such  reasons.  However,  the  in- 
conveniences of  the  State-Church  system  grew  more  and 
more  apparent,  and  the  separation  could  not  be  long 
postponed. 

From  now  till  the  time  of  the  abrogation  of  the  Civil 
Constitution  of  the  Clergy,  the  Convention  took  advan- 
tage of  it  to  make  their  authority  bitterly  felt  by  the 
State  Church.  The  former  Assembly  had  continued  the 
salaries  of  such  priests  as  took  wives ;  this  was  equiva- 
lent to  declaring  their  marriage  legal.  The  Con- 
stitutional Bishops  were  mostly  opposed  to  this,  and 
especially  was  this  the  case  with  Fauchet.  His  opposi- 
tion became  a  matter  of  debate  in  the  Convention,  in 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 


209 


July,  1773.  Lacroix  declared  that  the  Bishops,  being 
salaried  by  the  government,  ought  not  to  oppose  any  of 
its  laws.  Danton  was  more  emphatic:  "We  have  con- 
tinued to  the  Bishops  their  salaries,"  said  he,  "  now  let 
them  imitate  Christ  and  the  Apostles.  These  rendered 
to  Cesar  what  belonged  to  Cesar.  Very  well !  the  na- 
tion is  greater  than  all  the  Cesars."  It  was  in  vain  urged 
that  the  marriage  of  priests,  being  a  matter  of  Church 
doctrine,  a  Bishop  might  withhold  his  nuptial  blessing 
from  the  marriages  of  priests,  and  yet  not  offend  against 
the  civil  laws.  Matters  went  from  bad  to  wrorse,  and 
the  height  of  the  Reign  of  Terror  was  not  far  in  the 
distance. 

In  order  to  understand  the  character  of  those  orgies 
of  impiety  which  were  so  fatal  to  the  Revolution,  it  is 
necessary  to  cast  a  glance  at  the  condition  of  the  differ- 
ent parties.  On  the  overthrow  of  the  Girondists,  June 
2,  1793,  the  radical  extremists  remained  masters  of 
the  whole  machinery  of  government.  And  they  were 
faced  by  dangers  which  led  them  to  the  exertion  of  all 
their  power.  The  proscription  of  the  escaped  Girondists 
caused  several  insurrections.  Lyons  was  in  full  revolt, 
and  it  required  an  army  to  reduce  it.  Toulon  surrender- 
ed to  the  English.  La  Vendee,  entirely  in  revolt,  made 
common  cause  with  the  foreign  coalition  which  was 
pressing  upon  France  at  the  Xorth,  at  the  Alps,  and  at 
the  Pyrenees.  More  than  once  the  fate  of  the  nation 
was  at  stake.  At  Paris  itself  the  assassination  of  Marat 
by  a  pure  and  noble  young  woman,  showred  what  enthu- 
siasm the  cause  of  the  Girondists  could  excite. 

It  is  well  known  by  what  miracles  of  energy  the  Rev- 
27 


210        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror, 

olution  made  face  to  all  their  dangers.  Lyons  and  Tou- 
lon were  taken  by  rapid  sieges.  A  new  system  of 
democratic  tactics,  which  consisted  in  hurling  heavy 
masses  on  a  single  point,  drove  back  the  allied  armies. 
Finally,  after  a  succession  of  battles,  the  upper  hand  was 
gained  in  La  Vendee  toward  the  close  of  IT 93.  The 
victories  of  Wattignies  in  Flanders,  and  Cholet  in  La 
Vendee,  terminated  victoriously  the  campaign.  At  the 
same  time  great  reforms  in  civil  matters  evinced  the  un- 
conquerable faith  of  the  Revolution  in  the  future.  The 
Normal  and  Polytechnic  Schools  were  established,  and 
a  vast  plan  of  instruction  elaborated.  The  foundations 
of  the  Civil  Code  were  laid.  Attention  was  given  even 
to  the  fine  arts,  and  vast  museums  opened.  Uniformity 
of  weights  and  measures  was  established,  a  great  and 
lasting  reform.  This  terrible  energy  of  the  Revolution 
on  the  frontiers,  and  these  useful  reforms  at  home,  are 
its  greatest  glory.  But  with  what  different  feelings  do 
we  view  the  bloody  orgies  which  attended  it.  We  shall 
always  believe  them  to  have  been  unnecessary.  ~No,  we 
will  never  admit  that  France  could  not  rise  to  the  high- 
est courage  without  plunging  herself  into  a  cruel  deli- 
rium. We  do  not  see  that  victory  deserted  her  flag  the 
day  when  a  single  color  ceased  to  swallow  up  the  other 
two — the  day  when  it  ceased  to  bathe  in  the  blood  of  the 
scaffold.  Those  judges  bring  dishonor  on  the  country 
who  pretend  that  it  could  not  have  been  saved  except 
at  this  price.  Let  them  not  forget  that  the  crimes  to 
which  they  attribute  such  honor  excited  many  more 
dangers  than  they  surmounted. 

It  is  from  the  month  of  September,  1793,  that  the 


Religion  and  the  lie  ign  of  Terror.         21 1 

Reign  of  Terror  was  fully  in  play.    It  came  forth,  full 

armed,  from  the  sitting  of  the  fifth  of  this  month,  on  oc- 

casion  of  one  of  those  imperious  demands  of  a  deputation 

from  the  people  of  Paris,  which  completely  swayed  the 

Convention.    "  Let  us  make  terror  the  order  of  the  day," 

exclaimed  the  unprincipled  and  cowardly  Barrere.  The 

decree  which  he  proposed  organized  a  revolutionary  army 

of  six  thousand  men,  who  were  charged  with  the  duty  of 

crushing  every-where  the  counter-revolution.    The  pain 

of  death  was  pronounced  against  whoever  should  trade 

in  assignats.  To  hasten  its  judgments  the  Revolutionary 

Tribunal  was  divided  into  four  sections.    The  nocturnal 
■ 

searching  of  houses  was  authorized,  terror  became  the 
sum  of  the  politics  of  the  day.  It  hung  over  the  heads 
of  the  generals  in  the  field.  If  they  did  not  gain  vic- 
tories, or  if  they  failed  to  make  a  good  use  of  them,  they 
were  recalled  and  sent  to  the  scaffold,  as  in  the  cases  of 
Custine  *  and  Houchard.  If  a  Deputy  showed  signs  of 
mercy,  or  hesitation,  he  was  taken  from  his  seat  and 
executed.  No  home  was  safe  day  or  night.  No  one 
knew  when  to  feel  secure  from  the  lightning-stroke  of 
terror.  It  fell  on  the  middle  classes  as  well  as  on  the 
aristocracy.  It  filled  the  prisons  with  a  crowd  of  pris- 
oners, on  whom  the  insatiable  guillotine  made  its  daily 
feasts.  But  even  all  this  could  not  hinder  the  gayety  so 
natural  to  the  French,  from  making  game  of  their  fiend- 
ish hangmen.  On  the  third  of  October  the  Convention 
decreed  death  within  twenty-four  hours  on  every  returned 
emigrant  priest  on  whom  any  counter-revolutionary  sign 
might  be  found,  or  who  should  be  suspected  of  relations 
*  See  Appendix,  note  30. 


212        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

with  the  enemy.  The  evidence  of  two  witnesses  was 
declared  sufficient.  In  February,  1794,  it  was  declared 
that,  in  cases  of  arrested  priests,  no  recourse  to  the  Court 
of  Appeals  should  be  allowed.  In  October  of  the  pre- 
vious year  Marie  Antoinette,  after  having  suffered  all 
the  shame  of  a  terrible  captivity,  was  dragged  before  a 
merciless  tribunal,  and  quickly  handed  over  to  the  exe- 
cutioner. Her  noble  dignity  was  unabashed  before  her 
outragers,  and  even  touched  the  hearts  of  the  female 
monsters  who  had  assembled  to  rejoice  in  her  disgrace. 
A  few  days  later  the  noble  bearing  of  the  Girondists, 
who  sang  a  patriotic  hymn  while  on  their  way  to  the 
scaffold,  struck  fear  to  the  hearts  even  of  the  Terrorists. 
Never  had  they  appeared  greater  than  "  on  the  car  of 
death.  The  noble  Bailly  and  Barnave  followed  them 
very  soon.  The  first  two  generations  of  the  revolution 
were  thus  swept  away,  to  give  scope  to  the  third.  It 
seemed  not  enough  to  strike  the  noblest  of  the  living; 
the  bones  of  the  dead  were  insulted.  The  monuments 
and  ashes  of  the  long  line  of  French  kings,  and  other 
noble  personages,  were  taken  from  their  long  resting-place 
in  the  Church  of  St.  Denis  and  cast  into  a  common  ditch. 
We  should  not  be  surprised  if,  at  this  time,  the  revolu- 
tionists, in  their  rage  to  break  entirely  with  the  past,  at- 
tempted to  treat  God  as  they  had  already  treated  royalty. 

It  was  the  municipality  of  Paris  that  in  November, 
1193,  took  the  initiative  in  the  atheistical  movement.  Its 
action  was  governed  less  by  fanaticism  than  by  calcu- 
lating policy.  The  flattering  Chaumette  *  and  the  vile 
Hebert  had  more  at  heart  to  out  do  Robespierre  than 
*  See  Appendix,  note  31. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  213 

to  serve  the  cause  of  Atheism.  Anacharsis  Clootz  alone 
was  sincere;  he  assaulted  religion  from  personal  ha- 
tred. Hebert  *  aspired  to  the  role  of  Marat.  He  hoped 
to  be  borne  to  the  highest  place  on  the  shoulders  of  the 
rabble.  This  coarse  blasphemer  was  a  mere  sycophant 
who  spoke  the  language  of  the  gutters  to  please  the 
sovereign  mob.  He  and  Chaumette  imagined  that  the 
surest  way  to  attain  their  purpose  would  be  to  attack  the 
Supreme  Being,  who  was  supported  by  Robespierre  with 
all  the  resources  of  his  pedantry.  In  this  way  they 
might  cast  their  foe  into  the  shade,  or  distance  and  leave 
him  among  the  apologists  of  the  exploded  past.  The 
anti-religious  furor  had  found,  in  the  continued  resist- 
ance of  the  priests  of  the  old  Church,  the  means  of  ever- 
increasing  growth.  This  seiwed  as  a  pretext  for  the 
attack  on  religion  itself.  It  was  easy  to  involve  the 
Constitutional  priest  in  the  general  odium  of  his  caste, 
and  to  represent  God  himself  as  the  great  enemy  of  sans- 
culottism.  As  the  Convention  had  listened  to,  and  even 
applauded  the  boldest  attacks  on  the  ancient  faith,  it 
seemed  an  easy  task  to  gain  it  entirely  to  the  cause  of 
Atheism.  With  the  Convention  and  the  faubourgs  on 
their  side,  the  Jacobins  would  be  obliged  to  follow  also, 
and  this  would  be  the  fall  of  Robespierre,  or,  in  case  he 
followed  the  movement,  his  moral  abdication.  The  plan 
was  well  laid,  as  was  proved  by  its  several  days  of  suc- 
cess ;  but  neither  Hebert  nor  Chaumette,  nor  both  of 
them,  were  equal  to  Robespierre.  They  fell  in  the 
struggle,  but  not  before  they  had  succeeded  in  bringing 
about  the  most  hideous  scandal. 

*  See  Appendix,  note  32. 


214        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

The  Hebertists  in  their  impiety  did  not  go  beyond  the 
natural  tendency  of  the  philosophy  of  the  eighteenth 
century.  Already  this  had  exhibited  itself  more  than 
once  in  the  National  Assembly.  They  simply  abased  it 
from  the  sphere  of  ideas  into  the  unclean  minds  of  the 
mob,  and  translated  it  into  indecent  orgies.  It  is  cer- 
tain that  they  could  little  shock  an  Assembly  which 
had  already  decreed  to  abolish  the  Christian  era,  and, 
erasing  the.  name  of  Christ,  to  make  the  new  era  date 
from  the  foundation  of  the  republic.  Nothing  better 
than  this  proves  that  the  Revolution  was  determined  to 
enter  into  a  war  with  the  old  divinities,  and  to  propose 
itself  as  the  new  religion  of  the  future.  The  new  calen- 
dar, which  had  been  presented  by  Romme,  and  adopted 
on  the  fifth  of  August,  1793,  fixed  the  beginning  of  the 
new  era  on  the  twenty-second  of  September,  1792,  a  day 
which,  curiously  enough,  coincided  with  the  autumnal 
equinox  and  the  foundation  of  the  republic.  Decades, 
or  weeks  of  ten  days  each,  took  the  place  of  the  ordi- 
nary week.  The  nionths«were  called  by  philosophical 
names,  such  as  Justice,  Equality,  etc.  By  way  of  ex- 
ception June  was  called  the  Oath  of  the  Tennis-court, 
and  J uly  memorized  the  taking  of  the  Bastille.  These 
names  of  the  months  were  changed,  on  the  third 
of  November,  on  motion  of  Fabre  d'Eglantine,  who 
caused  the  Assembly  to  adopt  a  less  abstract  nomencla- 
ture—one which  should  recall  the  succession  of  the  sea- 
sons. To  the  months  were  given  poetical  names.  The 
first  three,  or  autumn  months,  were  named  Vendemiaire, 
JBrumaire,  and  Frimaire,  recalling  the  vintage,  the 
haze,  and  the  hoar-frost.    The  next  three,  or  those  of 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.         21 5 

winter,  were  termed  Mvose,  Plumose,  and  Ventose,  in 
reference  to  snow,  rain,  and  wind.    The  spring  months 
were  Germinal,  Florial,  and  Prairial,  in  allusion  to 
germination,  flowers,  and  meadows.     The  last  time 
months,  Messidor,    Thermidor,  and  Fructidor,  were 
those  of  summer,  and  marked  the  seasons  of  harvest,  of 
heat,  and  of  fruit.    The  motives  which  prompted  this 
bold  innovation  were  honestly  explained  by  Fabre 
d'Eglantine.     "Long  use,"  said  he,  "has  filled  the 
memories  of  the  people  with  a  large  number  of  long 
venerated  images,  which  have  been,  and  are  yet  to-day, 
the  source  of  religious  errors.    It  is  therefore  necessary 
to  substitute  for  these  fictions  of  ignorance  the  realities 
of  reason,  and  for  the  prestige  of  priestcraft  the  truth  of 
nature."    He  avowed  his  intention  of  counteracting  the 
influence  the  priests  obtained  by  the  association  of  their 
festivals  with  the  chief  epochs  of  the  year.    "  When  the 
festival  of  the  dead  is  to  be  celebrated,"  said  he,  "  it  is 
not  amid  the  young  life  of  spring  that  the  priests  play 
their  farce,  but  it  is  at  the  close  of  the  beautiful  days, 
when  a  gray  and  dull  sky  fills  our  mind  with  a  tender 
sadness.    Then,  taking  advantage  of  the  farewells  of 
nature,  they  seize  our  attention,  and,  through  the  clap- 
trap of  their  festivals,  paint  to  our  minds  all  that  their 
impudence  has  imagined  of  mystical  and  delightful  for 
the  predestinated,  that  is  to  say,  the  imbecile,  and  of 
terrible  for  the  sinner,  that  is  to  say,  the  clear-headed." 
After  mentioning  other  cases  where  the  Church  had 
taken  advantage  of  the  seasons  in  fixing  its  festivals, 
Fabre  d'Eglantine  opposed  to  the  old  religious  system 
his  new  agricultural  calendar,  which   was  designed 


216        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

equally,  but  in  a  contrary  design,  to  fill  the  imagination 
of  the  people  with  grand  images.  The  year  was  to 
close  with  five  grand  festivals,  bearing  the  expressive 
name  of  Sansculotides,  which  were  to  occupy  the  sur- 
plus days  beyond  the  decimal  number  360.  They  were 
the  festivals  of  genius,  of  labor,  of  action,  of  reward, 
and  of  opinion.  The  latter  was  a  sort  of  political  car- 
nival of  twenty-four  hours,  during  which  it  was  lawful 
for  any  citizen  to  write  or  say  whatever  he  pleased 
about  any  public  officer.  It  was  for  those  in  power, 
the  last  judgment  of  the  year  under  the  presidency  of 
ridicule.  The  propositions  of  Fabre  d'Eglantine  were 
decreed  with  enthusiasm  by  the  Convention.  Thus  the 
National  Assembly  changed  itself  into  a  council  of 
philosophy,  and  made  creeds  by  authority  with  as  little 
regard  for  conscience  as  had  ever  been  done  by  the 
councils  of  the  Romish  Church.  To  interfere  thus  with 
the  religious  habits  of  the  people  was  to  inaugurate  the 
most  intolerable  of  despotisms,  to  confound  absolutely 
the  spiritual  and  the  temporal  powers,  and  to  inaugurate 
what  might  properly  be  called  the  Islamism  of  wicked- 
ness. The  Convention  thus  resuscitated  the  most  intol- 
erant features  of  the  former  hierarchy,  and  fondly  be- 
lieved itself  liberal  because  it  had  rejected,  and  sought 
to  put  down,  the  worship  of  the  God  of  the  Christians. 

The  municipality  had  some  reasons  for  believing  that 
it  would  be  seconded,  if  it  pushed  even  to  the  furthest 
extreme  the  irreligious  movement.  It  broached  the 
matter  by  provoking  numerous  and  clamoring  anti- 
religious  petitions.  On  the"  28th  of  August,  1793,  a 
deputation  of  teachers  presented  itself  to  the  Conven- 


Udujion  and  thi  Bi  ign  of  Terror.  217 

tion  to  plead  for  a  system  of  gratuitous  and  obliga- 
tor? instruction.  One  of  the  children  who  accompanied 
them  demanded  that,  instead  of  being  preached  to  in  the 
name  of  .the  pretended  God,  they  be  taught  the  principles 
of  equality,  the  rights  of  man,  and  the  constitution  of  the 
country.  Such  a  profanation  of  infancy  should  have  ex- 
cited the  most  lively  indignation  ;  but  instead  of  that,  the 
deputation,  like  all  similar  ones,  was  warmly  applauded, 
whatever  a  few  of  the  Deputies  may  have  thought  who  yet 
remained  attached  to  the  religion  of  their  fathers.  These 
surely  must  have  felt  that  silence  on  such  an  occasion 
was  cowardice.  Some  days  after  this  scandal  a  deputa- 
tion from  Xe  vers  .appeared  in  the  Assembly  bearing  the 
spoils  of  churches,  and  demanding  the  suppression  of 
the  Catholic  worship.  At  one  of  the  clubs  a  renegade 
Bishop  was  heard  to  exclaim,  "  The  priests  are  vile 
wretches ;  I  know  them  better  than  others,  for  I  have 
been  one  of  them."  Some  days  previously  a  Constitu- 
tional Bishop  presented  to  the  Convention  "  his  spouse," 
boasting  that  he  had  taken  her  from  anions:  the  sans- 
culottes.  He  mt  warmly  applauded,  and  came  near 
getting  an  addition  of  two  thousand  francs  to  his  sal- 
ary. Nothing  would  have  been  more  natural,  for  he 
had  well  merited  of  the  Convention  by  dishonoring  his 
onto.  Thus  the  movement  was  turned  against  all  the 
clergy,  the  constitutional  as  well  as  the  refractorv. 
The  Atheists  sought  in  every  way  to  obtain  apostasies, 
and  in  that  way  defame  religion  through  its  own  minis- 
tm  An  ex-priest  formally  demanded  of  the  munici- 
pality the  privilege  of  changing  his  name  from  Erasmus 
to  Apostate.    Chaumette  and  Ilebert  planned,  in  secret 

28 


218        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

meetings  with  Clootz,  Momoro,  Bourdon  de  l'Oise,  and 
others,  a  great  public  spectacle.  It  was  no  less  than  the 
inauguration  of  the  worship  of  reason  in  open  Conven- 
tion, by  introducing  certain  priests,  who  were  to  cast  at 
the  foot  of  the  national  tribune  the  symbols  of  super- 
stition. The  farce  was  played  on  the  seventh  of  No- 
vember. As  the  Convention  was  presided  over  by  Laloi, 
who  was  in  perfect  accord  with  the  municipality,  the 
leaders  of  the  scheme  had  reason  to  expect  favorable 
replies.  The  scene  was  opened  by  the  reading  of  a 
letter  from  a  country  Curate  by  the  name  of  Parens, 
who  declared  himself  ready  to  abjure,  provided  that  he 
was  assured  of  a  pension.  " I  am  a  priest,"  said  he ;  "I 
am  a  Curate,  that  is  to  say,  a  quack.  Thus  far  I  have 
been  quack  in  good  faith  ;  I  have  deceived,  because  I 
myself  had  been  deceived.  Now  that  my  eyes  are 
opened,  I  confess  that  I  would  rather  not  be  a  dishonest 
quack.  However,  poverty  might  constrain  me  to  it. 
It  seems  to  me  that  it  would  be  well  to  assure  a  living 
to  such  as  are  willing  to  render  justice  to  truth."  This 
doughty  confessor  was  unwilling  to  be  impious  gratui- 
tously, and  seemed  disinclined  to  change  his  trade  with- 
out assurance  of  salary.  And  this  piece  of  debasement 
was  applauded  by  a  National  Assembly !  After  the  little 
farce  was  to  follow  the  grand  comedy.  The  president 
announced  to  the  Convention  that  the  regular  authori- 
ties of  the  municipality  of  Paris  were  present  at  the  bar 
of  the  house  in  company  with  Bishop  Gobel,  together 
with  his  vicars  and  several  priests.  Momoro  declared 
with  great  parade  that  these  citizens  wished  permission 
to  regenerate  themselves  and  become  men.    Under  the 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  219 

guidance  of  reason  they  had  come  to  cast  off  the  char- 
acter which  superstition  had  imposed  upon  them. 
"  Thus,"  said  he,  "  the  French  Republic  will  soon  have 
no  other  worship  than  that  of  reason,  equality,  and 
eternal  truth."  Gobel  arose  amid  a  shower  of  applause. 
He  was  all  the  more  contemptible  on  this  occasion 
for  the  reason  that  he  yielded  to  no  momentary  and 
overpowering  gush  of  enthusiasm,  for  he  was  no  more 
an  Atheist  than  he  was  a  Christian ;  he  only  desired  to 
save  his  life  amid  the  revolutionary  tumult.  "  The  will 
of  the  people,"  said  he,  "  was  my  first  law ;  submission 
to  their  will  my  first  duty."  It  is,  therefore,  under  the 
influence  of  fear  that  he  abandons  Christianity,  and 
sacrifices  to  the  idol  of  the  moment,  namely,  the  popu- 
lar will,  that  God  in  whom  he  does  not  cease  to  believe. 
He  had  so  expressed  himself  to  Bishop  Gregory  a  few 
days  previously.  The  cowardly  apostate  floated  con- 
tinually between  the  fear  of  the  scaffold  and  the  fear  of 
hell,  the  latter  of  course  gaining  the  upper  hand  when 
he  was  taken  to  the  guillotine.  To-day,  however,  his 
words  were  greeted  with  unbounded  applause,  for  he 
had  well  merited  of  the  Atheists  by  dishonoring  the 
first  bishopric  of  France.  "  Citizens,"  said  the  presi- 
dent to  Gobel  and  the  other  priests  about  him,  "  citi- 
zens, you  have  just  sacrificed  on  the  altar  of  the  country 
these  antiquated  gewgaws;  you  are  worthy  of  the  re- 
public." Thereupon  ex-Bishop  Gobel  assumed  the  re- 
publican cap,  and  received  the  fraternal  embrace.  Ig- 
noble sentiments  may  sometimes  excite  almost  as  much 
momentary  enthusiasm  as  real  heroism.  Several  priests 
now  vied  with  each  other,  who  should  first  resign  their 


220        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

character  as  clergymen.  Bishop  Lindet  surpassed  all. 
He  pretended  that  he  had  accepted  a  bishopric  only  to 
serve  his  country,  and  that  he  had  never  been  a  quack, 
or  the  dupe  of  superstition.  It  was,  therefore,  very  easy 
to  renounce  what  he  had  never  truly  believed.  He  was 
followed  by  Julien  of  Toulouse,  a  Protestant  Pastor, 
who  spoke  in  a  similar  strain,  and  said  that  he  had 
never  been  any  thing  but  an  officer  of  morality,  profess- 
ing the  most  absolute  tolerance.  "  I  have  exercised," 
said  he,  "  the  functions  of  a  Protestant  minister ;  I  de- 
clare that  I  shall  profess  them  no  longer,  and  that 
henceforth  I  shall  have  no  other  temple  than  the  sanc- 
tuary of  the  laws,  no  other  divinity  than  liberty,  no 
other  worship  than  civil  order,  and  no  other  gospel 
than  the  republican  constitution."  '  It  is  thus  shamefully 
that  Julien  represented  in  the  Convention,  a  martyr 
Church  which  had  never  flinched  before  caresses  or 
sufferings.  Such  is  the  lesson  that  this  base  mind 
brought  from  the  wilds  of  the  desert,  where  he  had 
once  had  the  honor  of  celebrating  an  outlawed  worship. 
What  a  contrast  between  this  day  of  ignominy  and  the 
glorious  days  of  his  youth,  when  he  had  suffered  for  his 
belief!  He  had  doubtless  long  since  fallen  from  his 
faith,  and  was  thus  unprepared  for  an  hour  requiring 
moral  heroism. 

It  could  not  well  be  that  amid  all  this  turpitude  the 
Christian  conscience  should  remain  without  witness. 
It  made  its  inflexible  voice  heard  at  a  profaned  tribune, 
and  despite  the  cries  of  rage  which  fain  would  have 
hushed  it.  Its  mere  apparition  was  a  terrible  rebuke 
for  the  cowardly  scene  which  had  just  been  witnessed. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  221 

It  was  Gregory,  Bishop  of  Blois,  who  gave  this  grand 
spectacle  to  his  country.    Of  a  mind  ardent  and  gen- 
erous, he  had  more  than  once  pushed  his  enthusiasm  to 
imprudence ;  and,  though  he  had  not  voted  for  the  death 
of  the  King,  yet  in  an  unfortunate  moment  of  excite- 
ment he  had  rejoiced  in  his  downfall.    He  was,  never- 
theless, a  sincere  Christian  and  a  noble  soul.    He  had 
never  denied  a  single  one  of  his  convictions,  much  less 
his  God.    He  still  wore  the  ecclesiastical  costume,  which 
of  itself  was  at  this  period  an  act  of  courage.  Occupied 
on  this  occasion  in  the  Educational  Committee,  he  was 
entirely  ignorant  of  what  had  taken  place  in  the  hall  of 
the  Convention.    Immediately  on  his  entrance  he  was 
besieged  by  a  crowd  of  radical  Deputies,  who  pressed 
him  with  frantic  gestures  to  follow  the  "good  example  " 
of  Gobel.    Every-where  the  words  were  heard,  "  You 
must  mount  the  rostrum."    "And  why?"  asked  he. 
"  To  renounce  your  character  of  Bishop,  your  religious 
charlatanism,"  was  the  reply.   "Miserable  blasphemers," 
said  he,  "  I*have  never  been  a  charlatan.    Loving  my 
religion,  I  have  preached  the  truth,  and  shall  remain 
faithful  to  it."    Hoping  to  constrain  him  to  follow  the 
current,  the  president  gave  him  the  privilege  of  speak- 
ing without  his  asking  it.    He  ascended  the  rostrum, 
and  immediately  a  deathly  silence  took  the  place  of  the 
clamorous  tumult.     "I  have  entered  the  Assembly," 
said  he,  "  with  very  vague  notions  of  what  took  place 
before  my  arrival.    I  hear  invitations  to  make  a  sacri- 
fice for  my  country ;  I  am  accustomed  to  that.    Is  the 
question  as  to  attachment  to  the  cause  of  liberty  ?  I 
have  proved  that  by  my  life.    Is  my  salary  as  Bishop 


222        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

at  stake  ?  I  abandon  that  to  you  without  regret.  Is 
my  religion  called  in  question  ?  That  matter  is  outside 
of  your  domain,  and  you  have  no  right  to  attack  it. 
I  hear  it  spoken  of  as  fanaticism  and  superstition. 
I  have  combated  these  always ;  but  if  you  will  define 
these  words,  you  will  see  that  fanaticism  and  supersti- 
tion are  directly  opposed  to  religion.  As  to  me,  Catho- 
lic by  conviction  and  by  feeling,  priest  by  choice,  I 
have  been  selected  by  the  people  for  the  office  of 
Bishop ;  but  it  is  neither  from  them  nor  from  you  that 
I  hold  my  mission.  I  have  consented  to  bear  the  bur- 
den of  the  episcopacy  in  a  time  when  it  involved  extra- 
ordinary difficulties.  I  was  implored  to  accept  it ;  I  am 
implored  to-day  to  make  an  abdication  which  will  not, 
which  cannot,  be  extorted  from  me.  I  have  endeavored 
to  do  good  in  my  diocese,  acting  from  principles  which 
are  dear  to  me,  and  which  I  defy  you  to  take  from  me. 
I  shall  'remain  Bishop  to  continue  my  work.  I  invoke 
the  liberty  of  conscience." 

This  discourse  was  interrupted  at  almost  every  word. 
It  excited  cries  of  frantic  rage.  "  I  doubt,"  says  Greg- 
ory in  his  Memoires,  "  whether  the  pencil  of  Milton, 
accustomed  as  it  was  to  depict  demoniac  spectacles, 
could  have  done  justice  to  this  scene.  Descending  from 
the  rostrum  I  returned  to  my  place.  The  Deputies 
shunned  me  as  if  I  had  been  infected  with  leprosy. 
Wherever  I  looked  I  saw  eyes  glaring  on  me  with  fury ; 
menaces  and  insults  poured  upon  me  in  a  torrent.  Op- 
pressed with  the  sight  of  the  outrages  committed  against 
religion,  I  thanked  God  that  he  had  sustained  my  feeble- 
ness and  given  me  strength  to  confess  Jesus  Christ.  I 


Religion  and  tJw  Reign  of  Terror.       *  223 

declare  that  in  pronouncing  this  discourse  I  believed 
myself  to  be  pronouncing  my  death  sentence."  The 
same  evening  and  the  following  days  the  residence  of 
Gregory  was  besieged  by  emissaries  summoning  him  to 
yield  to  the  universal  wish.  A  hostile  placard  was 
posted  on  the  walls  of  Paris  denouncing  him  to  the 
Revolutionary  Tribunal.  Fourcroy,  his  colleague  in 
the  Educational  Committee,  blamed  him  publicly  for 
having  checked  the  current  of  opinion.  He  said,  "We 
must  crush  this  infamous  religion."  Gregory  was  an 
object  of  special  dislike,  for  the  reason  that  he  wished 
to  Christianize  the  Revolution.  But  he  wavered  not  in 
the  hour  of  storm.  Deep  down  in  the  hearts  the  epis- 
copal costume  of  the  Christian  Deputy  was  much  more  re- 
spected than  the  revolutionary  cap  of  the  apostate  Gobel. 
And  he  received  the  confidence  of  some  of  the  ringlead- 
ers of  the  atheistical  movement,  who  trembled  in  secret 
at  the  thought  of  the  God  whom  they  were  insulting. 

In  the  sittings  which  followed  that  of  the  seventh  of 
November,  scandalous  abjurations  succeeded  each  other 
without  interruption.  That  of  the  Bishop  of  Haute 
Vienne  was  distinguished  by  its  abjectness.  He  strove 
to  pass  for  a  vile  hypocrite  in  order  to  induce  all  to 
believe  that  he  had  always  been  impious.  "And  I 
awr,"  said  he,  "I  was  philosopher,  though  Bishop.  If 
I  did  not  long  since  reveal  my  secret,  it  is  because  the 
people  were  superstitious,  and  the  government  inquisi- 
torial. Thanks  to  thee,  augast  radical  wing,  it  is  finally 
permitted  to  say  the  whole  truth  above-board."  An- 
other provincial  Bishop,  Lalande,  declared  that  hence- 
forth he  would  proclaim  only  the  eternal  dogmas  which 


224        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

are  traced  in  the  great  book  of  nature  and  reason 
Chabot,  the  married  Capuchin,  came  to  make,  in  his  own 
name  and  in  that  of  his  wife,  a  very  unnecessary  re- 
cantation; for  no  one  doubted  his  perfect  impiety. 
Abbot  Sieyes  finally  felt  himself  obliged  to  break  the 
prudent  silence  which  he  had  observed  for  so  long  a 
time.  He  said  that  he  had  been  a  victim  of  supersti- 
tion. This,  however,  had  not  prevented  him  from  ac- 
cepting several  benefices,  and  the  pension  which  he  still 
was  receiving  amounted  to  ten  thousand  francs.  "  No 
man  in  the  world,"  added  he,  "can  say  he  has  been 
deceived  by  me."  This  meant  that  for  a  long  time  he 
had  celebrated  a  mass  in  which  he  no  longer  believed. 

After  the  abjurations,  came  the  patriotic  offerings 
which  had  been  torn  from  the  treasures  of  t^e  churches. 
Multitudes  flocked  to  the  Convention  and  to  the  muni- 
cipality, bearing  precious  vases,  copes,  sacerdotal  orna- 
ments, and  all  objects  of  value  which  had  been  con- 
nected with  worship.  It  was  deeided  to  open  a  public 
depot  for  them,  and  a  committee  was  appointed  to  re- 
ceive and  classify  the  spoils  of  superstition.  The  bear- 
ers of  these  spoils  generally  took  advantage  of  the 
occasion  to  make  a  speech.  "  Dionysius  of  Syracuse," 
said  the  orator  from  Sens,  "took  from  Jupiter  his 
mantle  of  gold,  under  pretext  that  it  was  too  cold  for 
winter  and  too  warm  for  summer;  we  also  take  from 
our  saints  and  their  ministers  the  splendid  vestments 
which,  doubtless,  are  to  tfcem  a  matter  of  embarrass- 
ment." An  orator  from  another  locality  brought,  in 
guise  of  a  patriotic  gift,  among  other  things,  the  re- 
•  puted  head  of  St.  Denis,  and  felt  constrained  to  say 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  225 

that,  for  his  part,  he  had  never  been  tempted  to 
ki>s  the  fetid  relic.  He  continued,  in  terras  equally- 
elegant,  "This  skull  and  these  sacred  tatters  which 
accompany  it  are  now  to  cease  to  be  the  ridiculous 
objects  of  the  veneration  of  the  people.  The  gold 
and  silver  which  envelop  them  are  to  contribute  to 
establish  the  empire  of  reason  and  liberty."  It  was 
a  great  harvest  for  JPere  Ditehene,  the  infamous  jour- 
nal of  Hebert ;  its  obscene  slang  was  heard  in  open 
Convention. 

The  Protestants  of  Paris  saw  fit  to  follow  the  impulse 
of  the  moment.  Two  of  their  number,  representing  the 
others,  bore  to  the  municipal  authorities  the  vessels  of 
silver  which  had  served  for  the  administration  of  bap- 
tism and  the  Lord's  supper.  The  orator  of  the  occasion 
said:  "All  ranks  united  drank  out  of  these  cups  of 
equality  and  fraternity ;  my  ministry  has  always  had 
for  its  object  to  propagate  such  principles.  Shame  on 
all  the  clap-trap  of  falsehood  and  puerility  which  igno- 
rance and  cunning  have  clothed  with  the  pompous  name 
of  theology."  The  President  replied,  saying  that  if  any 
religion  could  be  preserved  it  would  surely  be  that  one 
which  had  best  guarded  the  principles  of  equality ;  but 
that  as  reason  was  now  prevailing  men  would  henceforth 
know  no  other  worship  than  that  of  liberty  and  equality. 
After  the  Protestants,  the  Jews,  unwilling  to  remain  in 
the  background,  brought  their  offerings  also.  It  was  an 
emulation  in  wickedness  that,  for  the  moment,  pervaded 
all  classes. 

The  apostasies  constituted  the  first  act  in  the 
comedy  gotten  up  by  the  municipality  of  Paris.  It 

20 


226        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

was  now  necessary  to  pass  to  the  second.  It  was  not 
enough  to  have  beaten  down  the  ancient  idols;  it  was 
found  needful  to  inaugurate  with  parade  a  new  worship, 
that  of  Reason  and  Nature.  In  other  words,  it  was  ne- 
cessary  to  amuse  and  entertain  the  people  in.  order  to 
prevent  them  from  returning,  like  a  dog,  to  their  vomit. 
Ex-Bishop  Lindet  had  proposed,  the  very  day  of  the 
abjurations,  the  replacement  of  the  religious  by  civic 
festivals.  To  the  poet  Chenier  was  confided  the  task  of 
filling  the  vacuum  left  by  the  fall  of  the  ancient  ritual, 
but  it  was  soon  perceived  that  something  more  was 
required  than  rhetorical  flowers  and  academical  strophes. 
One  of  the  wards  of  Paris  decided  that  on  every  tenth 
day,  the  festival  which  took  the  place  of  the  old  Sunday, 
there  should  be  a  patriotic  homily  on  morality  and  the 
Constitution  ;  but  this  was  a  recreation  very  insufficient 
for  a  people  who  were  fond  of  spectacles.  The  muni- 
cipality determined  to  get  up  a  great  theatrical  parade 
which  would  speak  to  the  eye  and  seduce  the  imagina- 
tion. The  opera  was  put  in  requisition.  It  furnished 
for  the  occasion  a  vestal,  to  represent  the  goddess  of 
Reason,  and  give  a  little  animation  to  this  religion  of 
nonentity.  It  was  in  £he  cathedral  of  Notre  Dame  that 
the  municipality  erected  the  stage  for  enacting  this  con- 
temptible profanation.  The  Temple  of  Philosophy  was 
constructed  in  the  choir.  It  was  ornamented  with  the 
effigies  of  the  sages,  and  reposed  on  the  summit  of  a 
miniature  mountain.  The  Torch  of  Truth  blazed  on  the 
corner  of  a  rock.  Young  ladies  in  white,  and  crowned 
with  oak  leaves,  surrounded  the  verdure-draped  seat  of 
the  goddess  of  Reason,  and  chanted  in  her  honor  a 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  227 

frigid  hymn  composed  by  Chenier  for  the  occasion. 
It  began  thus : 

11  Descend,  0  Liberty,  daughter  of  nature, 
The  people  have  reconquered  their  power  immortal ; 
Upon  the  pompous  ruins  of  ancient  imposture, 
Tfeeir  hands  erect  thy  altar." 

A  poor  lyric  for  the  inauguration  of  a  new  religion  ! 
"  To-day,"  said  Momoro  in  a  journal,  "we  may  say  that 
the  day  of  rest  has  slain  the  Sabbath.  It  has  just  re- 
ceived the  death-stroke  in  the  ci-devant  metropolitan 
church,  at  present  the  Temple  of  Reason."  The  members 
of  the  Convention,  not  having  been  able  to  be  present  at 
Xotre  Dame,  were  honored  in  the  evening  with  a  visit 
by  the  goddess.  The  trivial  ceremonies  of  the  morning 
were  repeated.  The  President  gave  to  the  goddess  the 
fraternal  embrace.  Thereupon  the  whole  company  shed 
tears,  and  sang,-  and  acted  odiously  and  ridiculously. 
There  remained  of  that  day  only  the  remembrance  of  a 
stupid  parody,  which  of  itself  was  no  small  vengeance 
for  that  holy  religion  which  had  been  trampled  under 
foot.  It  was  in  vain  that  at  Paris  and  in  the  provinces 
it  was  attempted  to  reanimate  the  fervor  by  replacing 
the  actresses  by  prostitutes.  Ennui  and  disgust  struck 
a  fatal  blow  at  the  new  worship  from  the  very  start. 
It  was  attempted  to  enliven  it  by  debauchery.  The 
church  of  St.  Eustache  was  transformed  into  a  vast  hall 
of  revelry.  Apostate  priests  were  seen  dancing  with 
harlots  around  bright  fires  fed  by  holy  books  and 
rituals,  copes  and  relics.  And  this  delirium  was  propa- 
gated like  a  sort  of  death-dance  throughout  the  nation. 
At  Lyons  an  ass,  clothed  in  sacerdotal  robes,  was  led 


228        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

in  a  procession  through  the  streets.  On  the  twenty- 
second  of  November  the  same  masquerades  which  a 
few  da^s  before  had  disgraced  the  Convention,  were 
re-enacted  in  its  midst.  A  procession  of  persons, 
dressed  in  pontifical  robes,  was  preceded  by  a  num- 
ber of  sappers  and  cannoneers.  This  was  followed  by 
an  immense  crowd,  marching  in  two  ranks,  and  cov- 
ered with  mock  clerical  regalia,  copes,  and  chasubles 
of  gilded  velvet.  Upon  hurdles  were  borne  a  num- 
ber of  ciboria  and  costly  relic-caskets.  Martial  in- 
struments executed  national  airs.  A  banner,  waved 
to  the  melodious  sounds  of  a  popular  song,  pictured 
forth  the  vanishment  of  fanaticism,  while  the  vigor- 
ous execution  of  the  revolutionary  dance  announced 
the  triumph  of  the  new  worship.  At  the  sight  of  this 
edifying  spectacle  the  President  of  the  Convention  ex- 
claimed, in  joy,  that  the  deputation  had  in  a  single  hour 
dashed  into  annihilation  eighteen  centuries  of  error.  A 
young  child  paid  its  homage  to  the  Assembly,  and  was 
overwhelmed  with  felicitations  for  having  recited  the 
Declaration  of  Rights.  To  it  was  voted  the  first  repub- 
lican catechism  which  should  be  published.  This  flow 
of  sensibility  for  the  poor  little  parrot  of  Atheism  was  a 
worthy  climax  to  the  ridiculous  farce. 

The  municipality  attempted  to  profit  by  the  popular 
enthusiasm  for  Marat.  "  Several  of  the  wards  of  Paris," 
said  the  base  Hebert  at  the  tribune  of  the  Jacobin 
club,  "  are  anxious  to  render  homage  to  the  ashes  of  the 
friend  of  the  people.  The  population  prostrate  them- 
selves before  his  statue.  Very  well,  since  the  people 
must  be  amused  by  processions  and  religious  ceremonies 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  229 

why  shall  we  delay  to  decree  them  to  the  martyr  of 
democracy  ?  "  On  the  motion  of  David,  who  expressed 
himself  in  terms  of  the  vilest  enthusiasm,  the  Conven- 
tion decreed  that  the  remains  of  Marat  should  be  trans- 
ported to  the  Pantheon,  a  national  Church  dedicated  to 
the  great  men  of  the  nation.  The  veneration  for  this 
monster  knew  no  bounds.  Hymns  were  written  in  his 
honor.  On  divers  stamps  he  was  placed  by  the  side  of 
Christ.  Men  swore  by  the  sacred  heart  of  Marat. 
The  new  worship  was  complete  :  it  had  prostitutes  for 
goddesses,  and  a  man  of  violence  and  blood  for  a  martyr 
and  saint.  All  it  yet  lacked  was  to  engage  in  persecu- 
tion ;  and  it  failed  not  in  this  worthy  business. 

There  had  for  a  long  while  been  no  limit  to  the  viola- 
tions of  the  religious  liberties  of  the  non-conforming 
Catholics.  It  had  now  come  to  the  point  that  religion 
in  itself,  after  having  been  most  cruelly  outraged,  was 
to  fall  under  the  wrath  of  the  laws.  It  was  to  be  spared 
under  none  of  its  forms.  The  municipality  was  em- 
boldened in  its  persecutions  by  the  favor  with  which 
the  Convention  had  received  the  accounts  of  Fouche's 
atrocities  in  and  about  Lyons.  This  future  minister  of 
royalty  wrote  as  follows  to  his  colleagues  :  "  The  taste 
for  republican  virtues  and  austere  forms  has  penetrated 
all  classes,  now  that  they  are  rid  of  the  corrupting  in- 
fluence of  the  priests.  Some  of  these  impostors  are  in- 
clined ta  continue  playing  their  religious  comedies,  but 
the  sans-culottes  watch  them,  overturn  all  their  stages^ 
and  plant  on  their  ruins  the  tree  of  liberty.  Long  live 
the  republic!"  Fouche*  had  caused  the  cross  to  be 
*  See  Appendix,  note  33. 


230        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

demolished  in  the  grave-yards,  and  the  statue  of  Sleep  to 
be  substituted  in  its  place — a  consoling  image  for  men 
like  him,  who  felt  the  need  of  believing  that  after  death 
there  would  be  neither  resurrection,  nor  punishment  for 
crime.  The  municipality  judged  that  what  had  not 
been  disapproved  of  in  the  provinces  would  be  found 
good  in  Paris.  It  decreed  like  measures  for  the  grave- 
yards of  the  capital.  It  ordered  an  officer,  who  should 
wear  the  republican  cap,  to  be  put  in  charge  of  all 
funeral  processions.  A  standard  was  to  be  borne  before 
the  hearse,  upon  which  were  inscribed  the  following 
words :  "  The  just  man  never  dies ;  he  lives  in  the 
memory  of  his  fellow-citizens."  One  of  the  wards  of 
Paris  complained  that  the  devout  and  fanatical  still 
persisted  in  visiting  the  fonts  of  consecrated  water,  and 
demanded  of  the  Common  Council  that  the  scandal  be 
stopped,  and  that  the  imbeciles  be  deprived  of  all  hope 
of  a  revival  of  fanaticism.  The  municipality  decreed 
that  armed  force  should  be  used  to  put  a  stop  to  the 
practice.  But  this  was  not  enough.  A  general  decree 
was  now  wanted  which  should  entirely  abolish  the  lib- 
erty of  worship,  and  erect  the  service  of  Reason  into  an 
oppressive  religion  of  State.  To  strike  the  religious 
sentiment  of  the  Catholics  with  the  most  defiant  out- 
rage, the  municipality  had  sent  to  the  mint  the  precious 
mantle  of  St.  Genevieve,  the  cherished  patron  saint  of 
Paris,  and  had  ordered  the  destruction  of  all  the  images 
of  saints  which  ornamented  the  churches.  The  two 
grand  portals  of  Notre  Dame  were  saved  from  mutila- 
tion only  because  Dupuis  was  pleased  to  see  in  their 
work  of  sculpture  a  representation  of  the  planetary 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  231 


system,  by  which  he  explained  the  origin  of  all  relig- 
ion.   It -was  decreed  to  demolish  the  towers,  for  the 
reason  that  their  prominence  above  the  other  buildings 
was  a  violation  of  the  principles  of  equality.    The  mo- 
tion of  a  "virtuous  citizen,"  who  desired  to  see  all  the 
priests  incarcerated  as  suspected  persons,  was  received 
with  favor  in  the  same  sitting.    One  of  the  wards  peti- 
tioned that  the  Church  of  St.  Anthony  be  dedicated  to 
Reason,  and  that  an  altar  be  erected  in  it  on  which  there 
should  burn  a  perpetual  fire.    Thus  the  practices  of 
Asiatic  paganism  threatened  to  reappear,  at  the  very 
moment  when  the  Atheists  supposed  they  were  putting 
down  all  superstition  for  ever.    The  municipality  prof- 
ited by  this  occasion  to  decree  that  no  material  symbol 
whatever  should  be  erected  in  any  temple. 

In  the  sitting  of  the  26th  of  November,  1793,  the 
same  council  dared  to  strike  with  interdiction  e'very 
other  worship  than  that  of  Reason.  Chaumette,  in  some 
prefatory  remarks,  denounced  the  priests  and  harlots  as 
equally  hostile  to  the  interests  of  the  republic.  He 
painted  in  lively  colors  the  dangerousness  of  the  clergy. 
"They  are  capable,"  said  he,  "of  all  crimes,  and  avail 
themselves  of  poison  ;  they  will  work  miracles  if  you 
do  not  watch  them.  Consequently,  I  demand  that  the 
Council  declare  that  to  its  knowledge  the  people  of 
Paris  are  ripe  for  the  religion  of  Reason,  and  that  if 
there  takes  place  in  the  city  any  movement  in  favor  of 
fanaticism,  all  the  priests  shall  be  imprisoned,  wring 
that  it  has  been  declared  that  no  other  worship  is 
recognized  than  that  of  Reason."  The  decree  whirl, 
followed  this  elegant  discourse  was  as  follows:  "First, 


232        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 


all  the  churches  and  temples  of  all  the  religions  and  wor- 
ships which  have  heretofore  existed  in  Paris  shall  imme- 
diately be  closed ;  second,  all  the  priests  or  ministers  of 
all  religions  whatever  shall  be  held  personally  responsi- 
ble for  all  the  troubles  that  may  arise  on  account  of 
religious  opinions ;  third,  whoever  shall  demand  the 
opening,  whether  of  a  church  or  of  a  temple,  shall  be 
arrested  as  a  suspected  person ;  fourth,  the  Revolution- 
ary Committees  shall  be  invited  to  keep  special  watch 
over  all  the  priests ;  and  fifth,  the  Convention  shall  be 
petitioned  to  pass  a  law  excluding  priests  from  every 
manner  of  public  employment,  as  well  as  from  all  em- 
ployment in  manufactories  of  arms."  A  member  of 
the  Council  moved  to  amend  by  excluding  the  priests 
from  every  employment  whatever,  which  would  have 
been  equivalent  to  starving  them  to  death ;  but  this 
was  rejected.  And  surely  the  law  needed  nothing  to 
complete  its  monstrous  character.  Such  was  this  Chau- 
mette,  a  man  whom  the  great  and  popular  historian 
Michelet  dares  to  present  to  us  as  one  of  the  founders  of 
the  religion  of  the  future,  and  of  true  religious  liberty. 
The  fact  that  he  sprang  "  from  the  holy  mud  of  Paris  " 
is  not  enough  to  constitute  him  a  great  servant  of  lib- 
erty. This  decree  remains  for  ever  for  him  an  indelible 
stain.  It  is  true,  he  was  incontestably  a  model  of  im- 
piety ;  but  this  glory  will  hardly  justify  his  canoniza- 
tion. He  was  only  a  miserable  copyist  of  Diderot  and 
other  worse  men.  By  this  famous  decree  the  munici- 
pality had,  to  use  a  fashionable  figure  of  the  day,  ar- 
rived at  the  summit  of  its  capitol.  But  the  Tarpeian 
rock  was  not  far  distant.    Robespierre  had  sworn  its 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  233 

ruin,  and  he  felt  himself  supported  not  only  by  the 
Jacobins,  his  subservient  tools,  but  also  by  the  Conven- 
-  tion,  which  began  to  become  jealous  of  this  popular 
municipal  power  which  affected  to  play  the  dictator. 
We  have  explained  for  what  reasons  he  was  the  sworn 
enemy  of  Chaumette  and  Hebert.  Every  thing  in 
them  repelled  him  :  their  growing  popularity  wounded 
his  vanity ;  their  Atheism  conflicted  with  his  favorite 
Deism,  and,  with  his  correct  and  pedantic  conduct,  he 
could  not  but  be  affected  with  contempt  for  their  shame- 
less orgies  of  vice. 

The  struggle  broke  out  at  the  Jacobin  Club  Novem- 
ber 21,  1793.  Hebert  and  Momoro,  disquieted  at  the 
silent  opposition  of  Robespierre,  sought  to  turn  the 
stroke  which  menaced  them  upon  the  heads  of  the 
priests  and  of  the  Princess  Elizabeth.  But  Robespierre 
declared  that  the  dangers  of  the  republic  at  this  hour 
came  neither  from  the  priests  nor  the  impure  remnants  of 
the  race  of  the  tyrant.  He  manifested,  in  fact,  the  great- 
est contempt  for  the  pious  princess,  and  dared  to  style  her 
the  despicable  sister  of  Capet.  This  expression  is  an  in- 
delible stigma  on  the  name  of  the  cowardly  tribune,  and 
wrings  a  cry  of  indignation  even  from  his  warmest 
apologists.  Passing  to  the  priests,  he  expressed  lively 
pleasure  that  so  many  of  them  were  ready  to  throw  off 
their  old  character  and  take  offices  in  the  government, 
and  even  to  become  presidents  of  popular  societies. 
"  Fear  not  their  fanaticism,"  said  he,  "  but  rather  their 
ambition;  not  the  garment  they  wear,  but  the  new  skin 
they  have  assumed.  Fanaticism  is  a  ferocious  and  ca- 
pricious animal ;  it  flees  before  reason.    But  pursue  it 

30 


234        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

with  boisterous  cries,  and  it  turns  back  upon  you." 
Robespierre  did  not  dare  to«blame  the  popular  move- 
ment which  had  led  to  the  abandonment  of  the  old 
worship  and  the  spoliation  of  the  churches,  but  he 
attacked  those  who  took  advantage  of  it  to  gain  per- 
sonal importance.  "By  what  right,"  asked  he,  "do 
men,  thus  far  unknown  to  the  Revolution,  seek  in  the 
midst  of  these  changes  the  means  of  usurping  a  false 
popularity,  and  of  exciting  patriots  to  false  measures 
which  create  discord  and  trouble  ?  By  what  right  do 
they  degrade  the  solemn  homage  rendered  to  truth  into 
ridiculous  farces  ?  Why  allow  them  to  abase  the  dig- 
nity of  the  people,  and  attach  the  trappings  of  folly  to 
the  scepter  of  philosophy  ?  "  Hebert  might  well  trem- 
ble at  words  which  so  distinctly  designated  himself. 
He  might  well  see  the  edge  of  the  guillotine  hanging 
above  him  when  the  terrible  orator  brought  against  his 
party  the  dangerous  charge  of  dishonoring  the  Revolu- 
tion in  the  eyes  of  foreign  powers.  The  political  drift 
of  the  speech  appeared  more  especially  when  Robes- 
pierre insisted  on  the  maintenance  of  the  liberty  of 
worship.  He  declared  that  the  Convention  intended  to 
defend  this  right  both  against  its  opponents  and  against 
its  own  abuses.  Moreover,  the  priests  would  so  much 
the  longer  continue  to  say  the  mass  the  more  they  were 
hindered.  "He  who  wishes  to  hinder  them,"  said  he, 
"  is  more  fanatical  than  they  who  say  the  mass."  If  the 
Revolution  had  to  fight  fanaticism  it  had  equally  to 
strive  against  Atheism,  which  takes  from  virtue  its  hope, 
from  vice  its  punishment,  and  from  liberty  its  glorious 
sanction.    If  God  did  not  already  exist,  it  would  be 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  235 

necessary  to  invent  him.  What,  therefore,  was  to  be 
feared  above  all,  was  the.  counter-fanaticism  which  de- 
graded France  in  the  eyes  of  her  enemies,  and  was  their 
surest  coadjutor. 

The  municipality  of  Paris  could  not  have  asked  a 
more  explicit  declaration  of  war.  Robespierre  had 
taken  position.  He  closed  his  speech  by  demanding  a 
purification  of  the  Jacobin  club.  Each  member  was  to 
be  examined,  and  retained  or  rejected  by  a  vote.  No 
mistake  needed  to  be  made  ;  lives  were  at  stake  in  that 
tumultuous  examination  where  Robespierre  held  the 
decisive  balance  of  power.  The  municipality  attempted 
to  pay  audacity  with  defiance.  A  few  days  later,  it 
passed  the  decree  of  Chaumette  suppressing  all  worship 
but  that  of  Reason.  This  provoked  from  Robespierre  a 
terrible  speech  in  the  Jacobin  club.  He  renewed  his 
accusation  of  intrigue  with  foreign  enemies.  He  spoke 
as  a  master.  "  We  will  not  suffer,"  said  he,  "  the  stand- 
ard of  persecution  to  be  raised  against  any  religion,  nor 
aristocracy  to  be  confounded  with  a  religious  opinion. 
The  Convention  will  maintain  the  liberty  of  worship." 
But  he  hastened  to  prevent  this  liberty  from  being  un- 
derstood too  seriously  by  adding,  that  the  Convention 
would  impose  silence  upon  religious  controversy.  A 
strange  contradiction,  of  which  the  absurdity  is  less  fla- 
grant than  its  duration  in  France  persistent.  Robes- 
pierre, to  use  his  own  expressions,  tore  without  mercy 
the  mask  of  patriotism  from  the*  hideous  figure  of  the 
supporters  of  foreign  despotism,  who  by  their  ignoble 
farces  had  desired  to  represent  a  free  people  as  a  people 
of  Atheists,  and  to  transform  a  political  revolution  into 


236        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

a  miserable  religious  quarrel.  They  had  compromised 
the  nation  in  the  eyes  of  the  world  by  giving  the  enemy 
good  reason  for  saying,  "  See,  the  French  have  sworn  to 
maintain  universal  tolerance  and  the  liberty  of  worship, 
and  yet  they  persecute  all  religions."  Robespierre's 
success  was  complete  and  immediate.  Hebert  repu- 
diated without  shame,  that  very  evening,  the  atheistical 
movement  which  he  himself  had  been  the  foremost  to 
inaugurate.  He  dared  to  speak  as  follows,  in  the  face 
of  Paris  inundated  with  the  numbers  of  his  vile  journal, 
Pere  Duchene  :  "  Already  it  has  been  said  that  the  Pa- 
risians are  without  faith,  without  religion,  and  that  they 
have  substituted  Marat  in  the  place  of  Jesus.  Let  us 
refute  these  calumnies." 

The  same  day,  in  the  City  Council,  Chaumette  had 
declared  himself  in  favor  of  religious  liberty,  and  ex- 
hibited as  much  unction  in  defending  it  as  he  had  pre- 
viously shown  in  suppressing  it.  The  hall  in  which  he 
spoke  had  scarcely  yet  ceased  to  echo  the  sounds  of  his 
atheistical  harangues.  He  was  consistent  with  himself 
in  only  one  thing,  his  abuse  of  Christianity,  for  his 
main  reason  for  upholding  liberty  of  opinion  was,  that 
by  abandoning  the  sect  of  the  Nazarenes  to  contemptu- 
ous neglect,  they  would  occasion  it  to  die  of  itself; 
whereas  if  persecuted,  it  would  revive  to  new  life. 
Chaumette  concluded  by  demanding  that  the  Council 
should  ignore  all  meddling  with  the  different  religions. 
"  Inform  us  not,"  said  he,  "  if  such  a  one  goes  to  mass, 
to  the  synagogue,  or  to  the  sermon ;  inform  us  simply 
whether  he  is  a  republican.  Let  us  not  meddje  with  his 
whims  ;  let  us  govern,  let  us  assure  him  the  exercise  of 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  237 

his  rights,  even  that  of  being  superstitious.  I  ask, 
therefore,  that  the  Council  decree,  first,  that  it  will  hear 
no  proposition  relative  to  any  worship,  'or  any  religious 
or  metaphysical  idea ;  and  second,  that  inasmuch  as  the 
exercise  of  worship  is  free,  it  has  never  meant,  and  never 
means  in  the  future,  to  hinder  citizens  from  renting 
buildings  for,  and  paying  the  minister  of,  any  worship 
whatever,  provided  that  the  manifestation  of  this  wor- 
ship does  not  disturb  the  public  peace."  Never  before 
had  Hebert  in  his  younger  days  played  in  third  rate 
theaters  a  more  contemptible  comedy  than  the  one  he 
that  day  played  on  the  bloody  stage  of  the  munici- 
pality. His  utterances  excited  violent  opposition  among 
his  astonished  associates.  The  summerset  was  too  sud- 
den, the  conversion  too  hurried.  However,  his  propo- 
sition prevailed.  It  was  adopted  without  opposition,  to 
inform  Robespierre  that  henceforth  he  would  have  no 
trouble  in  crushing  such  contemptible  foes. 

The  recantation  of  the  municipality  prepared  the  way 
for  that  of  the  Convention.  In  the  sitting  of  Novem- 
ber 26,  Danton  had  expressed  himself  forcibly  against 
scenes  of  abjuration  in  open  Convention,  and  formally 
asked  that  no  more  anti-religious  farces  be  allowed  in 
the  Assembly.  He  uttered  this  remarkable  sentence  : 
"  If  we  have  not  honored  the  priest  of  error  and  fanati- 
cism, we  also  do  not  desire  to  honor  the  priest  of  incre- 
dulity." This  was  the  first  word  in  favor  of  clemency 
which  had  fallen  from  the  lips  of  Danton.  It  was  in 
vain  that  he  raised  his  thundering  voice  more  than 
usual,  and  called  for  an  increase  of  violence  against  the 
enemies  of  the  republic ;  he  had  mounted  the  first  step 


238        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

of  the  scaffold.  Robespierre  did  not  pardon  this  first 
show  of  rival  conservative  sentiment  at  the  moment 
when  he  himself  was  aiming  at  the  destruction  of  the 
extreme  Hebertist  radicals.  Before  attacking  Danton, 
however,  he  used  his  aid  in  the  mean  time  for  the  de- 
struction of  the  Atheism  of  the  municipality.  Some 
days  later  he  inserted  these  significant  words  in  a  mani- 
festo which  he  wrote,  and  which  was  sent  by  the  Con- 
vention to  the  people  of  Europe :  "  Your  masters  tell 
you  that  the  French  people  have  proscribed  all  relig- 
ions ;  that  they  have  substituted  the  worship  of  mere 
men  for  that  of  the  Divinity.  They  lie.  The  French 
people  and  their  representatives  respect  the  liberty  of 
all  religions,  and  proscribe  none.  They  abhor  intoler- 
ance and  persecution  under  whatever  pretext."  Bar- 
rere,  Robespierre,  and  Cambon  now  united,  and  finally 
succeeded  in  inducing  the  Convention  to  pass  a  decree 
which  to  some  extent  protected  the  general  liberty  of 
worship.  It  amounted  to  little  more  than  a  return  to 
the  state  of  things  which  existed  before  the  orgies  of 
Atheism  had  been  inaugurated  by  Hebert  and  Chau- 
mette.  Though  the  proscription  of  religion  was  to 
some  extent  checked,  still  the  liberty  allowed  was 
merely  religious  liberty  as  understood  in  1793. 

This  sort  of  liberty  was  like  the  ancient  gods  of 
Mexico,  it  was  bloodthirsty.  After  swallowing  up  the 
Girondists  it  called  for  the  vile  Atheistical  clique  of 
Hebert,  and  then  the  group  of  Dantonists.  Only  a 
word  of  indulgence,  or  perhaps  a  mere  sigh  of  weariness 
in  bloodshed,  was  needed  to  ruin  Danton.  Robespierre 
would  not  pardon  him  for  having  been  the  sublimest 


//-  ligicm  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  239 


revolutionist,  the  most  terrible  and  striking  embodiment 
of  a  nation  aroused  and  in  wrath.  He  pardoned  still  less 
Camille  Desmoulinfi  for  having  been  the  most  sparkling 
writer  of  Paris,  and  for  having,  though  after  much  per- 
nicious excess,  finally  turned  his  brilliant  wit  to  the 
service  of  clemency.  His  irony  and  eloquence  at  this 
period  have  not  been  equaled  since  Pascal,  and  the  five 
numbers  of  the  Old  Cordelier  may  be  styled  the  Pro- 
riiwitd  Letters  of  the  Revolution.  One  may  well  im- 
agine the  delight  they  afforded  to  the  oppressed.  Yes, 
if  Camille  had  been  less  great  as  a  writer  he  would  have 
been  less  guilty  in  the  eyes  of  the  cruel  and  plodding 
pedant  of  the  Jacobins.  At  least,  he  might  have  been 
Bayed  from  the  guillotine  had  he  not  declined,  with  a 
sarcasm,  the  insulting  protection  of  his  enemy.  But  to 
have  pleaded  in  favor  of  pardon  so  inopportunely,  at  the 
very  moment  when  Robespierre  was  about  to  develop 
in  the  Convention- his  famous  theory  of  a  republic  based 
on  the  two  principles  of  virtue  and  terror,  was  to  have 
committed  an  unpardonable  crime.  The  future  high 
prieSt  of  the  Supreme  Being  was  ascending  thus  by 
bloody  steps  to  the  altar  of  his  god.  To  arrive  there  he 
marched  over  the  dead  bodies  of  his  friends,  of  those  at 
whose  table  he  had  sat,  and  whose  marriage  contracts 
lie  had  signed.  Master  in  the  Jacobin  Club,  and  in  the 
Committees,  this  most  pure,  this  incorruptible  saint  of 
demagogism,  was  always  ready  with  some  furtive  plan 
of  conspiracy,  in  the  elastic  meshes  of  which  he  entan- 
gled all  his  adversaries,  or,  more  truly,  all  his  rivals. 
The  procedure  was  infallible  in  the  midst  of  a  trembling 
Assembly.     St.  Just,  the   right   arm   of  Robespierre, 


240        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

would  mount  the  tribune  and  read  in  his  monotonous 
voice  a  report,  every  sentence  of  which  fell  heavy  and 
terrible  like  the  strokes  of  the  executioner's  ax.  The 
report  was,  in  the  Convention,  what  the  guillotine  was  in 
the  judiciary.  In  both  cases  it  was  extermination  at 
the  instant.  The  machine  of  death  worked  as  well  in 
the  hands  of  St.  Just*  and  Barrere  as  in  those  of 
Samson. 

The  Hebertists  were  cast  into  prison  March  13,  1794 
after  the  attempted  insurrection  of  the  Cordeliers.  Dan- 
ton  and  his  friends  were  incarcerated  on  the  thirtieth 
St.  Just  was  the  accuser  in  both  cases.  As  to  the  trial, 
we  need  not  speak ;  it  was  the  most  infamous  mockery 
of  justice.  By  the  end  of  April  the  guillotine  had  done 
its  work,  and  Robespierre  could  breathe  freely,  foi 
there  was  little  to  check  the  regime  which  could  crush 
a  Danton.  Before  whom  should  the  Revolutionary 
Tribunal  hesitate  which  had  cut  down  him  who  first 
called  for  its  establishment?  Surely  the  blow  which 
had  fallen  on  the  Dantonists  was  well  merited  in  view 
of  eternal  justice  ;  but  that  the  instrument  of  punish- 
ment was  Robespierre,  and  that  his  motive  was  simply 
that  he  wished  to  push  crime  further — this  exasperates 
the  conscience.  The  blood  of  Danton  will  silence  for 
ever  the  apologists  of  his  rival.  It  is  in  vain  to  try  to 
color  the  act  with  policy,  and  to  say  that  Robespierre 
thought  he  was  serving  the  Revolution ;  it  is  none  the 
less  certain  that  on  that  day  he  obeyed  the  basest  pas- 
sion. It  is  not  so  much  the  fanatic  as  the  man  of  envy 
that,  in  him,  is  supremely  detestable. 

*  See  Appendix,  note  34. 


Udiijiun  and  the  Btiyn  of  Terror.  241 

He  awaited  till  after  this  triumph  before  giving  to 
France  the  religion  which  was  dear  to  his  heart.  The 
republican  armies  had  driven  the  enemy  beyond  the 
Rhine,  and  saved  Alsace.  The  insurrection  in  La  Yen 
dee  had  been  conquered  by  Kleber  and  Marceau  at 
Mans.  Toulon  had  been  retaken,  thanks  to  the  skill  of 
a  young  officer,  then  a  very  ardent  Jacobin — Xapoleon. 
On  the  frontiers  France  was  at  ease,  but  in  the  interior 
she  was  bowed  under  the  yoke  of*  terror.  This  terror, 
this  prostration  of  the  nation,  was  for  Robespierre  a 
mark  of  the  goodness  of  Providence.  He  had  no  longer 
to  fear  the  rhetorical  battle-ax  of  Danton,  or  the  keen, 
poisoned  arrows  of  Desmoulins.  He  could  now  expa- 
tiate in  the  Convention  as  in  the  Jacobin  Club,  and  play 
the  high  priest  without  being  laughed  at.  Fouquier 
Tinville,*  the  remorseless  public  accuser,  guaranteed 
him  against  ridicule.  On  the  sixth  of  April,  1794,  Cou- 
thon,  who  was  a  sort  of  John  the  Baptist  to  the  new 
messiah  of  the  Terrorists,  announced  that  the  Commit- 
tee  of  Public  Safety  had  decreed  a  festival  in  honor  of 
the  Eternal  On  the  seventh  of  May,  Robespierre  read 
his  memorable  report  on  this  subject.  It  is  his  master- 
piece. His  whole  soul  is  there  exhibited  with  all  his 
parade  of  virtue  and  morality,  and  his  hateful  passions. 
He  pours  insult  upon  the  memories  of  his  fallen  rivals, 
the  Girondists  and  Dantons.  He  exhibits  here  his  en- 
thusiasm for  Rousseau,  his  antipathy  for  the  aristocratic 
Atheists  of  the  Encyclopedia,  and  gives  us  a  good  ex- 
ample of  his  oratorical  style,  rich  in  personifications, 
generally  clumsy,  but  sometimes  rising  to  real  elo- 

*  See  Appendix,  note  35. 

31  |  I 


242        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

quence.  Every  line  is  imbued  with  that  sentimental 
demagogism  which  always  walks  in  company  with  sus- 
picion and  proscription.  But  what  mostly  concerns  us 
in  this  discourse  is,  the  pretension  of  the  dictator  to 
establish  by  legislation  a  new  religion  of  State,  an  ab- 
stract religion,  consisting  of  few  but  sharply  defined 
dogmas,  and  which  is  to  be  officially  professed  by  the 
country.  Robespierre  establishes  in  words  which  com- 
pel our  admiration,  the  connection  which  has  always 
existed  between  Atheism  and  the  death  of  liberty. 
"Who,"  exclaimed  he,  "has  given  you  the  mission  to 
teach  to  the  people  that  the  Divinity  does  not  exist  ? 
"What  advantage  in  teaching  man  that  a  blind  fate  pre- 
sides over  events,  and  strikes  alike  virtue  and  vice  ? 
Does  such  an  idea  inspire  him  with  purer  and  nobler 
sentiments,  -with  more  of  patriotism  and  bravery  against 
the  foe,  than  the  belief  in  the  immortality  of  the  soul  ? 
The  thought  of  the  Supreme  Being  and  of  immortality 
is  a  perpetual  motive  to  just  living ;  it  is  therefore  social 
and  republican.  What  have  the  conspirators  put  in  the 
place  of  that  which  they  destroyed  ?  Nothing  but 
chaos,  void,  and  violence.  They  despised  and  depraved 
the  people."  Robespierre  concluded  that  the  Conven- 
tion ought  to  decree  the  worship  of  the  Supreme  Being, 
and  inaugurate  it  by  a  grand  public  festival.  This  was 
simply  to  revive  the  Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy, 
and  adapt  it  to  his  chilly  system  of  Deism.  It  was  the 
consecration  of  the  theory  of  Rousseau  as  found  in  the 
Contrat  Social.  It  was  a  new  phase  of  the  old  Gallican 
theory  of  the  unity  of  Church  and  State.  In  another 
part  of  his  speech  Robespierre  develops  the  theory  of 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  243 

the  utility  of  religion  to  the  State.  "  In  the  eyes  of  the 
legislator,"  said  he,  "whatever  is  useful  and  good  in 
practice  is  the  truth.  The  greatest  benefit  to  society 
would  be  to  create  in  man  a  lively  instinct  on  moral 
subjects,  which  should  induce  him,  unaided  by  the  slow 
process  of  reasoning,  to  do  the  good  and  eschew  the 
evil.  Now  that  which  creates  this  instinct,  and  thus 
comes  to  the  aid  of  human  authority,  is  the  religious 
sentiment,  which  gives  to  the  precepts  of  virtue  the  sanc- 
tion of  a  Being  higher  than  man."  From  this  it  ap- 
pears that  Robespierre  desired  the  State  to  recognize 
the  idea  of  God,  not  because  it  is  true,  but  because  it  is 
an  effective  aid  in  governing  a  people.  In  this  the 
ardent  demagogue  fell  back  into  the  ancient  tradition. 
He  recognized  the  Supreme  Being,  as  Napoleon  soon 
after  recognized  the  Papacy,  for  the  good  of  the  State, 
and  the  greater  safety  of  the  government.  His  dis- 
course closed  with  an  encomium  of  the  liberty  of  wor- 
ship, very  mucli  out  of  place  at  a  time  when  he  was 
calling  for  a  national  religion,  and  in  a  speech  where  he 
was  prodigal  of  insults  to  fanaticism,  that  is  to  say, 
Christianity.  Had  the  new  worship  only  succeeded  in 
establishing  itself  fully,  it  would  soon  have  passed  from 
sarcasms  to  open  persecution,  and  thus  put  into  full 
] »ract  ice  the  whole  system  of  the  Contrat  Social.  Al- 
ready some  imprudent  ones  had  spoken  of  a  law  of 
sacrilege,  to  be  enacted  against  all  who  should  speak 
evil,  or  profane  the  name,  of  the  Supreme  Being.  A 
friend  of  Robespierre  had  even  dared  to  call  for  a 
decree  of  banishment  against  all  who  would  not  believe 
in  God.    The  Convention  ordered  translations  of  the 


244        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

speech  of  Robespierre  to  be  sent  to  all  Europe,  and,  of 
course,  decreed  the  festival  of  the  Supreme  Being.  The 
municipality  followed  the  example,  and  testified  its  zeal 
by  ordering  the  name  of  God  to  be  inscribed  on  all  tem- 
ples which  had  previously  been  dedicated  to  Reason. 
The  festival  took  place  on  the  8th  of  June,  1794. 

~No  pains  had  been  spared  to  render  it  grand  and 
sublime,  and  yet  it  was  doomed  to  fall  into  ridiculous 
puerilities.  Robespierre  presided  in  the  Convention  on 
the  occasion,  and  was  dressed  in  a  beautiful  suit  of  blue. 
His  head  was  covered  with  plumes,  and  in  his  hand  he 
held,  as  did  also  all  the  Deputies,  a  bunch  of  flowers, 
fruit,  and  ears  of  grain.  The  morning  was  beautiful  with 
sunshine.  The  Convention  took  seats  in  an  amphithea- 
ter which  had  been  erected  in  the  court  of  the  Tuileries. 
Robespierre  kept  them  waiting  a  while,  but  finally  made 
his  appearance.  His  usually  gloomy  countenance  wore 
that  morning  an  expression  of  benignity  and  happiness. 
After  a  pompous  speech,  in  which  he  told  the  republican 
Frenchmen  that  the  Supreme  Being  had  never  before 
witnessed  on  earth  a  spectacle  more  worthy  of  his  at- 
tention, he  descended  from  his  place,  and  seizing  a 
torch,  set  on  fire  the  images  of  Atheism,  Discord,  and 
Selfishness.  From  amid  their  smoke  and  ashes  there 
arose  triumphant  the  statue  of  Wisdom;  but  unfortu- 
nately, and,  as  some  thought,  ominously,  it  was  sadly 
smoked.  The  high  priest  returned  and  delivered  a 
second  speech,  after  which  the  whole  Assembly  set  out 
in  procession  to  the  field  of  Mars.  The  Convention  was 
encircled  by  a  tricolored  ribbon  borne  by  children  or- 
namented with  violets,  by  young  persons  girdled  with 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  245 

oak  leaves,  and  by  aged  people  crowned  with  ivy  and 
olive.  After  the  Delegates,  came  a  rural  car  laden  with 
implements  of  agriculture.  It  was  drawn  by  the  in- 
evitable republican  oxen  with  gilded  horns,  and  fol- 
lowed by  the  equally  inevitable  young  ladies  in  white. 
Robespierre's  pride  seemed  to  be  redoubled,  and  he 
affected  to  walk  far  in  advance  of  his  colleagues.  Some 
of  them  approached  and  lavished  on  him  the  keenest 
sarcasms ;  some  laughed  at  the  new  pontiff,  and  said,  in 
allusion  to  the  smoked  statue  of  Wisdom,  that  his  wis- 
dom had  become  darkened ;  others  uttered  the  word 
tyrant,  and  remarked  that  there  were  Brutuses  still. 
One  said  to  him  these  prophetic  words  :  "  The  Tarpeian 
rock  is  close  to  the  capitol."  Arrived  at  the  Field  of 
Mars,  the  Convention  took  position  upon  an  artificial 
"  mountain."  The  President  expatiated,  the  young  la- 
dies in  white  chanted,  the  aged  pronounced  their  bene- 
diction, the  cannons  thundered,  and  the  whole  affair 
closed  with  the  cry  of  Long  live  the  republic!  From 
all  this  theatrical  pomp,  from  these  ridiculous  symbols 
and  chilly  rites,  France  learned  one  lesson,  namely,  that 
it  is  easier  to  decree  a  change  of  religion  than  to  effect 
it.  Deism  can  never  establish  a  worship,  and  all  at- 
tempts in  this  direction  will  fall  under  the  ridicule  and 
contempt  of  the  public.  The  festival  was  found  by  many 
to  be  dull  and  long,  especially  by  those  who  were  of- 
fended at  the  prominent  role  played  in  it  by  Robes- 
pierre. It  is  said  that  one  of  his  colleagues,  less  patient 
than  the  rest,  said  to  him  in  terms  of  profane  emphasis, 
"  You  begin  already  to  bore  us  with  your  Supreme 
Being.91    What  vexed  very  many  that  day  was,  the 


246        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

prospect  of  having  in  France  a  tyrannical  dictatorship. 
That  very  day  Robespierre  seemed  to  be  at  the  summit 
of  power ;  and  yet  he  was  only  and  simply  preparing 
his  fall. 

It  is  not  our  business  to  trace  its  history.  The  abom- 
inable decree  of  June  the  12th,  (24  Prairial,)  by  which 
he  obtained  of  the  Convention  the  suppression  of  all 
legal  forms  in  the  trials  of  the  accused  before  the  Revo- 
lutionary Tribunal,  made  to  fall  upon  his  own  head  all 
the  crimes  to  which  it  led.  It  substituted  in  the  place 
of  evidence  a  mere  "  inspection "  of  the  accused,  and 
organized  a  sort  of  terror  within  terror.  •  Though  he 
was,  designedly,  much  absent  from  the  trials,  he  was 
none  the  less  guilty,  for  the  machine  of  death  was  of  his 
own  constructing.  That  he  was  overthrown  by  men  no 
better  than  himself  does  not  excuse  him,  and  the  27th 
of  July,  (9  Thermidor,)  the  day  of  his  fall,  was  none  the 
less  a  deliverance.  If  .the  reaction  toward  arbitrary 
power  began  from  that  moment,  where  does  the  blame 
rest,  if  not  on  the  detested  demagogue  who  had  dis- 
gusted France  with  liberty  by  changing  it  into  a  re- 
morseless demon,  which  was  only  satisfied  when  feast- 
ing on  massacres  ?  It  is  at  this  period  especially  that 
the  priests,  both  non-jurors  and  jurors,  falling  under  the 
general  title  of  "the  suspected,"  were  thrown  into  prison, 
and  in  large  numbers  delivered  to  the  guillotine.  The 
Revolutionary  Tribunal  sent  also  to  the  scaffold  the 
crazy  inventors  of  new  religions,  many  of  whom  now 
appeared;  for  whenever  a  people  is  deprived  of  true 
religion,  gross  superstitions  are  sure  to  spring  up  among 
the  masses.    The  ridiculous  affair  of  Catherine  Theot, 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  247 

the- aged  prophetess,  with  her  two  acolytes,  is  well 
known.    She  claimed  high  intimacy  with  the  Divinity, 
and  celebrated  a  stupidly  mysterious  worship,  in  which 
a  predominant  role  was  given  to  Robespierre,  though 
doubtless  without  his  knowledge.    For  the  rest,  he  had 
his  devotees,  especially  of  the  female  sex,  who  by  their 
imprudence  did  him  great  harm.    When  once  his  de- 
struction had  been  sworn,  advantage  was  taken  of  the 
idolatrous  devotion  shown  to  him  by  the  populace. 
Michelet  seems  astonished  at  the  reappearance  of  these 
crude  mystical  mummeries  after  the  nation  had  so  long 
been  under  the  healthful  influence  of  Voltaire,  and  at 
the  close  of  a  century  of  light.    He  forgets  that  in 
reality  any  religion  whatever  seems  to  the  masses  better 
than  the  cold  light  of  doubt,  which  reveals  only  the 
abyss  of  nonentity.    Between  total  incredulity  and  the 
coarsest  superstition,  there  is  but  a  single  step.    A  peo- 
ple deprived  of  their  God  will  soon  invent  idols.  With 
the  fall  of  Robespierre  closes  the  period  of  the  civil 
religion.    An  attempt  at  a  separation  of  Church  and 
State  immediately  follows. 


BOOK  THIRD. 


THE  PERIOD    OF  THE   SEPARATION   OF  CHURCH 
AND  STATE. 


CHAPTER  I. 

MEASURES  OP  THE  CONVENTION  IN  REGARD  TO  RELIG- 
ION FROM  THE  FALL  OF  ROBESPIERRE  TO  THE  EX- 
PIRATION OF  ITS  POWERS. 

The  situation  of  France  immediately  after  the  fall  of 
Robespierre  was  veiy  peculiar.  The  party  which  had 
triumphed  held  in  the  main  the  principles  of  him  who 
had  fallen.  It  had  long  labored  for  their  triumph,  and 
largely  put  them  into  practice.  It  numbered  in  its 
ranks  some  of  the  most  dreaded  chiefs  of  the  Revolu- 
tion. Its  most  prominent  leader,  Tallien,*  was  not  free 
from  the  blood  of  the  great  massacres.  The  party 
merely  grew  weary  of  terror  a  little  later  than  Danton, 
and  a  little  sooner  than  St.  Just  and  Robespierre.  This 
was  the  sole  difference  between  it  and  those  whom  it 
had  put  down.  Its  policy  was  still  arbitrary,  and  it 
was  determined  to  enforce  its  own  view  of  liberty. 
Though  desiring  to  avoid  as  much  as  convenient  the 
use  of  the  guillotine,  it  by  no  means  thought  of  discard- 

*  See  Appendix,  note  36. 
32 


250         Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

ing  it  altogether  for  political  offenses.  However,  it  was 
no  longer  possible  to  continue  the  reign  of  terror.  Pub- 
lic opinion,  when  once  freed  from  constraint,  took  its 
natural  course,  and  would  not  be  satisfied  with  half 
measures.  It  had  no  difficulty,  now  that  the  men  of 
strong  conviction  had  been  put  down,  in  managing  and 
shaping  the  measures  of  the  intriguing  democrats,  who 
had  a  long  list  of  crimes  to  be  pardoned.  Such  men 
were  Tallien,  and  many  of  his  friends.  Moreover,  a 
large  fraction  of  the  Convention  itself  had  now  for  some 
time  been  little  more' than  an  echo  of  the  opinion  with- 
out. Victims  of  terror  rather  than  its  instruments, 
these  timid  Deputies  had  cursed  the  necessity  which 
had  compelled  them  by  cowardly  silence,  and  even  by 
votes,  to  sanction  so  many  crimes.  So  great  was  the 
pressure  exerted  on  many  of  the  Deputies  in  the  darkest 
days  of  terror,  that,  fearing  to  take  seats  with  either 
party,  on  the  right  or  on  the  left,  they  remained  crowded 
together  in  the  middle  space  at  the  foot  of  the  tribune. 
They  knew  that  the  Moderates  of  to-day  might  be  de- 
clared suspected  as  traitors  on  the  morrow.  These 
courageous  gentlemen  belonged,  in  advance,  to  the  party 
of  moderation.  The  moderation  then  in  vogue,  how- 
ever, was  far  from  a  truly  liberal  regime.  Though  un- 
willing that  the  prisons  should  longer  remain  crowded 
with  the  innocent,  and  that  the  guillotine  should  receive 
its  daily  feast  of  human  bodies,  it  still  remained  implac- 
able toward  all  known  foes.  Public  opinion  was,  there- 
fore, earnestly  on  the  side  of  the  Convention  in  the 
famous  insurrection  of  the  5th  of  October,  1795,  (13 
Vendcmiaire,)  and  against  the  Royalist  party.     It  is 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  251 

true,  it  had  also  been  with  the  Convention  at  the  time 
of  the  closing  of  the  Jacobin  Club.  Too  often,  however, 
the  reaction  which  set  in  on  the  fall  of  Robespierre  was 
but  a  continuation  of  the  Reign  of  Terror.  This  was 
well  seen  in  the  South,  where  the  vengeance  of  the  so- 
called  Moderates  was  almost  equal  to  the  .crimes  of  the 
Terrorists.  » 

As  to  matters  of  religion,  the  fall  of  Robespierre  in 
Thermidor  induced  no  very  rapid  change.  Persecution 
was  no  longer  so  atrocious,  but  still  all  the  laws  of  pro- 
scription remained  unrepealed,  even  when  liberty  of  wor- 
ship had  been  theoretically  re-established — a  liberty 
which  was  suspended  on  the  slightest  suspicion.  Public 
opinion  had  not  yet  returned  to  Christianity.  The  re- 
action of  Thermidor  was  imbued  fully  with  the  infidel 
philosophy  of  the  day.  Frivolous  and  ardent  for  pleas- 
ure, it  was  more  anxious  to  open  the  theaters  and  dan- 
cing halls  than  the  temples  of  God.  It  was  regarded  as 
an  eminently  praiseworthy  act  to  inaugurate  the  famous 
"  ball  of  the  victims,"  and  devote  the  memory  of  Robes- 
pierre to  execration.  While  dancing  to  the  honor  of 
the  dead,  they  thought  little  of  the  poor  priests  who 
were  yet  languishing  in  prison  or  exile.  Madame  Tal- 
lien,  displaying  at  the  opera  her  frail  beauty  and  lightly 
attired  classic  form,  was  a  fit  symbol  of  the  liberty  in 
vogue.  She  was  a  fine  personification  of  that  liberalism, 
vain  and  without  principle,  elegant  and  without  serious- 
ness, which  sought  its  manifestation  jn  extravagance  of 
costume  aud  unlimited  license.  True  greatness  and 
heroism  existed  only  in  the  armies.  Had  it  not  been 
for  the  incomparable  troops  and  the  able  young  generals 


252        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

in  command,  the  Revolution  would  have  rapidly  passed 
from  blood  and  terror  to  a  condition  of  moral  corrup- 
tion still  more  infamous.  War  purified  and  saved  it, 
and  in  turn,  itself  overthrew  it.  It  is  precisely  at  this 
period,  so  gloomy  in  the  interior,  and  seemingly  unfa- 
vorable to  a  return  to  religious  thought,  that  the  Chris- 
tian worship,  under  its  various  forms,  sprang  up  of  itself, 
and,  taking  advantage  of  an  imperfect  liberty,  devel- 
oped itself  in  an  extraordinary  manner.  Let  us  take  a 
survey  of  the  difficulties  with  which  it  had  to  contend, 
and  of  the  advantages  it  derived  from  its  freedom  from 
government  protection.  We  will  see  that  moral  inde- 
pendence is  so  great  a  boon  that  it  compensates,  to  some 
extent,  for  the  greatest  infractions  of  the  rights  of  con- 
science. 

We  have  mentioned,  as  they  were  enacted,  the  various 
decrees  of  the  Convention  against  religious  liberty. 
They  formed  a  Draconian  code,  whose  severity  was  not 
exceeded  by  that  of  the  Jesuits  against  the  Protestants 
under  the  old  regime.  During  the  hideous  Hebertist 
movement  both  non-jurors  and  jurors  fell  under  a  com- 
mon proscription,  and  the  prisons  were  filled  with  priests 
of  both  Churches.  The  Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy 
existed  only  in  the  letter  of  the  Constitution,  and  wor- 
ship was  rendered  as  impracticable  for  the  jurors  as  for 
the  non-jurors.  Apostasy  and  persecution  had  thinned 
the  ranks  of  the  clergy ;  no  salaries  were  paid,  and 
many  priests  were  on  the  point  of  starvation,  inasmuch 
as  they  had  been  excluded  from  all  public  functions. 
The  law  of  October  3d,  1*793,  which  condemned  to 
death  within  twenty-four  hours,  on  the  evidence  of  two 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  253 

witnesses,  every  priest  in  any  way  connected  with  riots, 
or  with  the  emigrants,  was  still  in  force.  Every  priest 
accused  of  "incivism"  was  condemned  to  deportation. 
Nothing  could  be  more  dangerous  than  the  vagueness 
of  such  an  expression,  for  in  the  time  of  Hebert  and 
Chaumette  it  was  incivism  even  to  declare  one's  self  a 
Christian.  Priests  who  would  not  renounce  their  faith 
had  for  this  reason  been  thrown  into  dungeons.  How- 
ever, the  bloodier  part  of  the  law  against  the  priests  was 
virtually  abrogated  at  the  fall  of  Robespierre ;  but  that 
clause  inflicting  deportation  on  obnoxious  priests,  and 
death  on  those  who  aided  or  concealed  them,  still  re- 
mained. Immediately  after  this  event  multitudes  of 
priests  passed  the  frontiers  and  entered  France.  This 
fact  was  commented  on  in  the  Convention,  and  an  effort 
made  to  revive  against  them  the  most  cruel  measures  of 
terror,  but  with  imperfect  success. 

While  the  regime  of  the  prisons  grew  milder  in 
Puds,  the  unfortunate  priests  who  were  waiting  de- 
portation in  the  roadstead  of  Aix  were  subjected  to  the 
greatest  cruelties.  Their  intolerable  sufferings  were 
protracted  more  than  a  year  after  the  fall  of  the  great 
Terrorist.  In  February,  1794,  the  convoy  of  which 
they  formed  a  part,  was  directed  toward  Rochefort. 
Their  long  journey  was  a  continued  torture.  They 
were  incessantly  hissed  and  maltreated  by  a  riotous 
populace.  They  were  frequently  insulted  by  infamous 
parodies  of  sacred  things.  At  Limoges  a  procession 
was  caused  to  pass  before  them  consisting  of  donkeys 
arrayed  in  pontifical  robes,  at  the  head  of  which 
marched  a  huge  swine  wearing  the  triple  crown.  They 


254        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

slept  at  night  in  prisons  or  other  inadequate  quarters, 
with  very  little  bedding. 

At  Rochefort  the  priests  were  thrown  pell-mell  among 
the  galley  slaves,  and  shared  their  infamy,  though  not 
their  food,  for  they  received  scarcely  the  meanest  neces- 
saries of  life.  Before  going  aboard  the  boats  they  were 
robbed  of  almost  every  thing  they  possessed,  especially 
of  whatever  belonged  to  the  practice  of  religion.  They 
succeeded  in  saving  only  a  single  Testament  and  a 
.  Prayer  Book,  which  they  preserved  carefully,  and  passed 
secretly  from  hand  to  hand.  The  sailors,  having  discov- 
ered an  ivory  image  of  Christ,  decapitated  it.  These 
men  were  chosen  from  among  the  violent  spirits  of  the 
Revolution.  They  insulted  the  priests  at  every  meal 
by  chanting  a  political  song  in  mockery  of  the  blessing. 
But  the  severest  trial  for  these  poor  priests  was  the 
strict  interdiction  of  all  acts  of  devotion.  They  were 
forbidden  to  kneel  down,  and  if  they  were  seen  to  move 
their  lips  in  prayer,  they  were  loaded  with  irons.  The 
officers  inflicted  on  them  hard  task-service,  which  was 
all  the  more  difficult  for  the  reason  that  they  had  lost 
all  physical  vigor,  and,  on  the  impure  and  scanty  food 
they  received,  could  by  no  possibility  repair  it.  At 
night  they  were  confined  in  narrow  and  ill-aired  dun- 
geons. The  scurvy  and  fever  broke  out  among  them, 
and  the  sick  were  thrown  together  into  a  boat  which 
was  a  hospital  only  in  name.  The  least  resistance  was 
cruelly  punished  by  coarse  under-officers.  A  priest  was 
even  shot  dead  without  the  form  of  a  trial,  and  others 
were  cast  into  irons  for  having  sent  a  remonstrance  to 
the  city.    To  these  physical  evils,  which  were  greatly 


Religion  and  the  Eeiyn  of  Tern  or.  255 

increased  by  the  terrible  winter  of  1795,  were  added  an 
intellectual  and  moral  prostration  which  led  more  than 
one  captive  to  a  sort  of  brutish  insanity.  Such  was  the 
condition  of  .these  men  at  the  time  when  the  so-called 
Gilded  Youth  were  filling  Paris  with  their  noisy  license. 
Had  the  violent  party  been  heard,  new  partners  of  their 
exile  would  have  been  sent  out.  Happily,  their  cause 
found  in  the  Convention  more  than  one  generous  advo- 
cate ;  but  it  was  only  after  many  efforts  that  a  repara- 
tive decree  was  obtained. 

Early  in  the  fall  of  1794  a  Deputy  had  demanded  a 
reprieve  in  favor  of  the  two  hundred  priests  awaiting 
transportation  on  the  Loire,  among  whom  were  several 
of  the  Constitutional  Clergy.  The  orator  spoke  with 
earnestness  against  their  condemnation,  and  asked  what 
was  the  difference  between  such  a  measure  and  the  pro- 
scriptions of  Robespierre,  or  even  of  Louis  XIV.  Some 
time  later  Gregory  took  the  liberty,  on  occasion  of  a 
petition  of  an  imprisoned  priest  eighty  years  of  age,  to 
express  his  indignation  at  the  continued  sufferings  of 
the  priests.  He  informed  the  Convention  that  out  of 
the  one  hundred  and  eighty-seven  who  had  been  con- 
fined at  Rochefort  only  seventy-six  had  survived  their 
mistreatment.  "  If  one  should  ask,"  said  he,  "  in  order 
to  grant  a  man  liberty,  whether  he  is  a  lawyer  or  a 
physician,  every  body  would  be  indignant.  Why  ask 
whether  he  is  a  priest  ?  Whatever  an  individual  may 
be,  if  he  is  a  bad  citizen  strike  him,  if  he  is  a  good 
citizen  protect  him.  So  long  as  we  act  otherwise  we 
will  have  only  the  regime  of  tyrants." 

Some  days  subsequently,  December  21st,  1794,  this 


256        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

noble  Deputy  mounted  the  tribune,  not  to  plead  for 
a  particular  petition,  but  to  defend  the  right  oi  con- 
science in  all  its  extent.  Gregory  possessed  not  the 
higher  gifts  of  eloquence  ;  his  speech  lacked  the  brill- 
iancy and  passion  which  stir  an  assembly  ;  but  his  un- 
questioned patriotism,  and  his  known  loyalty  and  intre- 
pidity in  the  accomplishment  of  duty,  had  conciliated 
for  him  universal  respect.  The  discourse  of  that  day 
was  one  of  the  noblest  acts  of  his  political  life.  The 
defects  of  his  gifts  were  redeemed  by  the  strength  of  his 
principles ;  and  by  the  nobleness  of  his  convictions  and 
the  energy  of  his  indignation,  he  rose  to  the  height  of 
true  eloquence.  His  speech  breathed  the  spirit  of  1789, 
and,  in  addition  thereto,  was  imbued  with  a  truly  Chris- 
tian inspiration.  Never  was  the  great  principle  of  re- 
ligious liberty  defended  under  more  moving  circum- 
stances  or  with  more  largeness  of  spirit.  "  You  have 
founded  the  republic,"  said  he ;  "  there  yet  remains  a 
great  task  to  accomplish — to  consolidate  its  existence. 
To  unite  the  hearts  of  the  citizens,  to  strengthen  the 
union  of  all  the  members  of  the  great  family,  is  a 
greater  work  than  to  gain  a  battle."  The  orator 
showed  that  the  surest  way  to  obtain  peace  abroad  was 
to  establish  it  at  home,  and  that  the  surest  way  to  per- 
petuate the  internal  dissensions  was  to  continue  and 
perpetuate,  by  persecution,  the  distinctions  of  caste 
which,  under  the  new  regime,  ought  altogether  to  dis- 
appear. And  this  was  done  so  long  as  individuals  were 
stricken  down  for  the  mere  fact  of  belonging  to  the 
classes  of  nobles  or  priests — so  long  as  particular  shades 
of  religious  opinions  were  opposed  by  force.    "  To  wish," 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  257 

said  he, "  to  govern  thought  by  authority  is  a  chimerical 
undertaking,  for  it  is  beyond  the  sphere  of  human  force. 
It  is  a  tyrannical  work,  for  no  one  has  a  right  to  assign 
bounds  to  the  thoughts  of  another."  Worship,  being 
but  the  manifestation  of  religious  thought,  ought  to  be 
entirely  free.  No  particular  worship  should  be  priv- 
ileged, but  all  forms  should  be  protected,  however 
absurd  in  themselves,  so  long  as  they  do  not  interfere 
with  the  public  peace.  Gregory  showed  with  great 
force  how  much  France  had  suffered  from  contrary 
principles  under  Louis  XI V.,  and  how,  on  the  contrary, 
Holland  and  America  had  prospered  under  the  regime 
of  religious  liberty.  Persecution  has  never  served  any 
other  end  than  to  strengthen  the  opinions  assailed. 
"  Its  inevitable  effect,"  said  he,  "  is  to  degrade  a  peo- 
ple ;  it  is  the  first  step  toward  slavery.  A  nation  with- 
out the  rights  of  conscience  will  soon  be  without  liberty. 
The  inexorable  voice  of  history  imprints  on  the  brows 
of  all  persecutors  the  brand  of  infamy." 

The  orator  had  been  heard  with  patience  so  long  as  he 
spoke  of  abstract  principles ;  but  this  ceased  as  soon  as 
he  touched  on  the  actual  condition  of  the  nation,  and 
portrayed  the  sad  effects  of  revolutionary  persecution. 
"  What,"  asked  he,  "  is  the  actual  state  of  things  in  this 
regard  ?  Liberty  of  worship  exists  in  Turkey,  it  exists 
not  in  France.  Is  this  a  fruit  of  that  philosophy  of 
tolerance  of  which  the  greatest  representative  was  car- 
ried in  triumph  to  the  Pantheon  ?  Is  this  the  liberty 
promised  to  all  nations,  and  which  our  armies  bear  to  the 
enslaved  of  Europe  ?    Let  us  beware.  Revolutionary 

persecution  will  produce  no  better  effects,  than  that 

33 


258        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

which  banished  the  Huguenots ;  it  will  expatriate  citi- 
zens, and  impoverish  the  land."  Gregory  warded  off 
the  charge  of  superstition  and  fanaticism  by  remarking 
that  these  terms  are  merely  relative  in  their  popular  use, 
and  that  every  one  is  always  the  fanatic  of  some  one 
else ;  for  example,  in  the  time  of  Clootz  one  was  a  fa- 
natic even  for  believing  in  God.  He  provoked  a  real 
storm  of  wrath  among  the  extremists  of  the  left  when 
he  defended  the  priests  who  had  remained  faithful  to 
their  religion,  and  exposed  the  cowardice  of  the  apos- 
tates. "  What  is  termed  superstition,"  said  he,  "  is 
surely  as  respectable  as  the  declamations  which,  a  year 
ago,  were  multiplied  at  our  bar,  and  of  which  the  sub- 
stance was  about  this  :  I  declare  to  you  that  for  long 
years  I  have  been  an  impostor  and  trifler ;  for  this  rea- 
son I  demand  that  you  accord  me  your  esteem,  and  give 
me  a  position."  The  war-m  applause  of  the  spectators 
sustained  the  orator  against  the  wrath  of  the  extremists. 
He  referred,  with  right,  to  his  own  example.  If  some 
had,  through  their  eloquence,  raised  armies  to  quell  the 
insurrection  of  La  Vendee,  he  felt  assured  that,  by  his 
obscure  correspondence  and  influence  as  priest,  he  had 
prevented  insurrections  of  a  like  magnitude.  When  the 
Convention  grew  boisterous,  and  desired  to  quench  the 
orator's  voice,  he  cried  out,  "  Has  it  come  to  pass  that 
Charles  IX.  and  Louis  XIV.  are  about  to  rise  from  their 
graves  ?  Tell  us  whether,  as  the  Protestants  formerly, 
we  are,  now,  to  be  forced  to  flee  our  country  and  beg  an 
asylum  and  liberty  on  foreign  shores  ?  "  Drowning  the 
clamors  with  his  earnest  voice,  he  continued :  "  What 
should  we  do  so  long  as  it  is  impossible  to  unite  all 


RtLiyio"*  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  259 

hearts  in  one  Cb'^oh  ?  We  must  guarantee  a  full  and 
unlimited  liberty  Tor  all  sects."  Gregory  terminated  his 
discourse  by  rendering  homage  to  Christianity,  showing 
its  salutary  tendency  to  develop  a  solid  patriotism  and 
a  spirit  of  obedience  to  magistrates  and  law.  During 
the  three  quarters  of  an  hour  while  he  was  pronouncing 
his  speech  the  radical  members  were  in  a  perfect  parox- 
ysm of  rage  ;  they  seemed  like  criminals  on  the  wheel  of 
torture.  The  speech  was  not  successful  in  immediately 
winning  the  Convention,  but  in  pamphlet  form  it  acted 
powerfully  on  the  nation,  and  finally  imposed  its  con- 
clusions on  the  government. 

We  have  seen  that  under  the  Constituent  Assembly 
the  great  obstacle  to  the  establishment  of  liberty  of 
worship  was,  the  salaried  State  Church  which  it  itself 
had  created.  At  the  opening  of  the  Legislative  Assem- 
bly, and  amid  the  difficulties  arising  from  this  Church 
system,  and  from  the  oath  required  of  the  priests,  the 
true  solution  of  the  trouble  was,  at  times,  caught  sight  of 
both  within  and  without  the  Assembly.  We  have  cited 
the  admirable  letter  of  the  Poet  Chenier.  But  the 
country  was  too  excited  to  hear  the  voice  of  wisdom 
which  counseled  the  entire  separation  of  Church  and 
State.  The  same  idea  reappeared  even  in  the  Conven- 
tion. It  was  pleaded  for  at  the  tribune  by  Cambon ;  but 
Robespierre,  with  the  true  instinct  of  revolutionary  des- 
potism, rejected  it.  Who  knows  what  he  might  have 
obtained  of  the  Convention,  if  he  had  not  fallen  in  Ther- 
midor  ?  Perhaps  he  would  have  realized  the  dream  of 
Rousseau,  and  given  to  his  pale  Deism  the  State  treas- 
ury for  support,  and  the  guillotine  'for  sanction.  After 


260        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

his  fall,  it  sufficed  that  he  had  defended  the  salarying  of 
the  worship  to  induce  the  Convention  to  reject  it.  In 
fact,  this  was  done  on  the  20th  of  September,  1794,  on  a 
simple  motion  of  Cambon.  It  would  seem  that  such  a 
measure  should  have  excited  considerable  debate,  inas- 
much as  it  was  very  far-reaching  in  its  effects,  and 
swept  away  the  whole  system  of  the  Gontrat  Social, 
which  had  caused  so  much  of  misfortune  to  the  Revolu- 
tion. But  it  did  not ;  it  was  passed  as  a  sort  of  matter 
of  course.  And  yet  this  motion  caused  to  triumph,  for 
the  first  time  in  France,  the  true  notion  of  the  State.  It 
is  impossible  to  exaggerate  its  importance.  The  reason 
why  it  excited  so  little  attention  in  the  Convention  was 
simply  that  tne  question  had  already  been  resolved  by 
events  rather  than  by  principles.  The  Convention  saw 
that  the  State-Church  system  had  been  worse  than  a 
failure ;  that  the  whole  subject  was  troublesome  and 
expensive,  and,  as  it  were,  in  despair  or  disgust,  or  per- 
haps in  mere  indifference,  it  voted  the  following  decree : 
"  The  French  Republic  pays  no  longer  either  the  ex- 
penses or  the  salaries  of  any  worship  whatever."  The 
most  complete  religious  liberty  was  the  legitimate  con- 
sequence of  such  a  measure.  The  Convention,  however, 
was  still  too  much  irritated  against  the  refractory  priests 
to  put  a  stop  to  the  persecutions. 

The  discourse  of  Gregory,  despite  its  seeming  check, 
prepared  the  way  for  a  return  to  more  healthful  princi- 
ples, though  it  did  not  prevent  the  Convention  from 
issuing  a  severe  decree  in  January,  1*795,  against  the 
non-juring  priests  who  had  returned  into  France.  The 
cause  so  earnestly  pleaded  by  the  Bishop  of  Blois  found, 


Belvjion  and  the  lleign  of  Terror.  2G1 

a  few  months  later,  a  more  fortunate  advocate  in 
the  person  of  Boissy  d'Anglas,  who  succeeded  all  the 
better  in  the  Convention  for  speaking,  not  in  the 
character  of  a  Christian,  but  in  that  of  a  skeptical  phi- 
losopher. He  wished  to  free  the  Revolution  from  the 
inconsistencies  in  which  it  had  become  involved  by  the 
entanglement  of  Church  and  State.  He  presented  his 
famous  motion  on  the  21st  of  February,  1795.  His 
speech  was  received  with  as  much  applause  as  that  of 
Gregory  had  excited  indignation,  though  both  pleaded 
for  the  same  principles.  Boissy  d'Anglas  knew  how  to 
pave  his  way  by  indulging  in  contempt  for  the  whole 
system  of  Christianity.  He  gave  clearly  to  understand 
that  he  was  far  from  pleading  for  liberty  of  conscience 
in  the  interest  of  religion.  This  he  treated  as  an  idle 
chimera,  destined  soon  to  disappear  in  the  light  of  phi- 
losophy. The  new  system  of  general  education  would 
dispel  from  the  minds  of  the  people  these  vain  remnants 
of  a  time  of  intellectual  slavery.  "  Soon,"  said  he,  "  the 
religion  of  Socrates,  of  Marcus  Aurelius,  and  of  Cicero 
will  be  the  religion  of  the  world."  The  surest  method, 
as  he  thought,  to  retard  this  happy  change  would  be  to 
use,  against  religion,  any  other  arms  than  those  of  rea- 
son. It  was  in  vain  for  the  orator  to  express  his  un- 
bounded contempt  of  Christianity ;  the  action  he  was 
taking  was  an  involuntary  acknowledgment  of  the  in- 
vincible power  of  the  system.  After  the  government 
had  in  vain  tried  to  crush  it  by  -violence  it  was  found 
necessary  -to  make  terms  with  it,  and  grant  it  peace. 
After  Boissy  d'Anglas  had  thus  paid  l>is  homage  to 
revolutionary  passion,  ho  presented  with  crreat  force  the 


262        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

advantages  of  religious  liberty,  and  of  the  separation  of 
Church  and  State.  He  referred  in  direct  terms  to  the 
fatal  error  of  the  Constituent  Assembly  on  this  subject. 
This  body  should  have  delivered  the  political  realm 
from  the  influence  of  religion,  allowed  each  citizen  to 
worship  as  he  pleased,  and  salaried  no  worship  what- 
ever ;  but  it  had  wished  to  create  instead  of  destroy,  to 
organize  instead  of  abolish.  It  had  created  for  religion 
a  pompous  and  expensive  establishment,  which  itself 
had  been  destroyed  by  fanaticism.  He  painted  in  lively 
colors  the  recent  religious  persecution,  so  much  the 
more  shameful  as  it  had  been  committed  in  regenerated 
France.  He  accused  it  of  having  crowded  the  prisons 
with  women,  children,  and  thousands  of  useful  laborers. 
In  these  circumstances  it  was  necessary  to  hold  fast 
the  principle,  that  the  Church  should  be  banished  from 
the  administration,  and  never  allowed  to  return.  The 
sole  law  for  the  Church  was  the  common  law.  Let  re- 
ligious associations  be  treated  as  other  associations, 
without  any  exception  in  their  favor  or  to  their  detri- 
ment. Religious  practices,  however  erroneous,  should 
not  be  treated  as  crimes.  The  human  heart  is  a  sacred 
asylum,  into  which  the  eye  of  the  government  should 
not  seek  to  penetrate.  Such  were  the  political  princi- 
ples advocated  by  this  philosopher.  The  great  princi- 
ple of  liberty  of  conscience  could  not  have  been  more 
effectually  defended.  Despite  some  calls  for  an  ad- 
journment, the  main  principles  for  which  he  pleaded  were, 
with  some  unfortunate  modifications,  made  into  law 
during  that  very  sitting.  The  law,  as  passed,  provided 
as  follows :  The  exercise  of  no  worship  would  be  dis- 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  263 

turbed  ;  no  worship  would  be  salaried,  no  buildings  fur- 
nished by  the  government  for  anv  worship  ;  the  eccle- 
siastical costume  would  not  be  tolerated;  the  ceremonies 
of  worship  would  not  be  permitted  except  in  the  locality 
chosen  for  that  purpose:  no  external  sign  designating 
the  place  of  worship  would  be  allowed^  no  perpetual 
endowment  of  Churches  would  be  suffered;  and  every 
assemblage  of  citizens  for  worship  would  be  subject  to  the 
surveillance  of  the  regular  civil  authorities.    Such  is  the 
substance  of  the  decree  which,  despite  its  incomplete- 
ness^ and  the  opposition  it  encountered  in  the  local  au- 
thorities, allowed  religion  to  spring  up  anew  on  the 
tormented  soil  of  France.    Under  its  favor  all  branches 
of  the  Church  were  allowed  every-where  to  celebrate 
their  worship.    In  another  place  we  will  describe  this 
fine  religious  movement. 

This  law  of  February.  1795,  (3  Ventose,)  was  far  in 
advance  of  the  real  sentiments  of  the  Convention. 
Revolutionary  passion,  ever  ready  to  break  out  afresh, 
often  sileneed  the  voice  of  reason.  Hence  the  manv 
contradictory  laws  on  matters  of  religion.  Thus  while 
one  Deputy  obtained  a  modification  of  the  law  of  de- 
portation, another  complained  bitterly  of  the  open  cele- 
bration of  the  non-juring  worship,  and  boasted  that  he 
hadpidmd  up  in  a  single  night  a  large  number  of  the 
offending  priests.  He  asked  that  precaution  be  taken 
against  the  influence  of  these  "infamous  mountebank.  1 
Jean-Bon  St.  Andre  attacked  the  law  itsel£  Fanati- 
cism, he  thought,  was  all  the  more  dangerous  as  that  it 
now  demanded  rights  and  justice.  Taliien,  though 
heaping  upon  the  priests  gross  insult,  asked  that  the 


264:        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

Convention  give  them  not  too  much  prominence  by 
continually  meddling  with  their  cause.  These  instances 
show  very  well  the  general  disposition  of  the  Conven- 
tion ;  for  every  measure  proposed  or  taken  against  the 
refractory  clergy  reacted  against  liberty  in  general.  In 
a  Journal  of  the  day,  issued  under  the  influence  ol 
Gregory,  we  are  told  that  in  the  departments  the  public 
offices  were  filled  with  petty  infidel  tyrants  ;  that  the 
persecution  was  only  diminished,  but  not  stopped ;  and 
that  every  day  the  Catholics  were  insulted  by  the  public 
functionaries.  They  found  great  difficulty  in  re-estab- 
lishing their  worship.  In  several  towns  the  authorities 
refused  them  a  place  for  worship,  though  they  eagerly 
hastened  to  furnish  quarters  for  theaters  and  other 
public  amusements.  In  one  province  an  officer  over- 
turned an  altar  as  soon  as  it  had  been  erected;  in  an- 
other some  innocent  priests  were  thrown  into  prison  by 
a  representative  of  the  peof)le.  In  Correze  the  officers 
charged  the  Catholics  who  wished  to  renew  their  wor- 
ship,  with  incivism,  and  styled  their  religion  an  absurd 
antiquated  ceremony.  On  pretense  that  it  disturbed 
the  public  peace  they  banished  all  worship  to  private 
houses. 

These  and  many  similar  details  that  might  be  given, 
show  how  imperfectly  the  sentiment  of  general  liberty 
was  as  yet  awakened.  And  yet  the  events  which  were 
now  taking  place  in  the  west  of  France  were  sufficient 
to  teach  the  partisans  of  the  Revolution,  that  the  surest 
means  of  pacifying  and  gaining  to  the  republican  cause 
the  whole  people,  was  simply  to  practice  an  unlimited 
religious  tolerance.    In  the  region  of  Cherbourg  and 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror-.  2G5 

Brest  the  authorities  had,  with  the  happiest  effects,  de- 
cided to  allow  perfect  liberty  to  all  sects  whatever. 
Similar  measures  had  been  taken  by  -General  Iloche  in 
La  Vendee.  "  It  were  to  be  desired,"  said  he,  "  that 
the  priests  had  not  been  incessantly  cried  out  against ; 
to  deprive  the  people  of  them  is  to  perpetuate  the  war 
indefinitely.  If  we  do  not  admit  religious  freedom  we 
must  renounce  the  hope  of  peace  in  these  pails.  Let  us 
once  totally  forget  the  priests,  and  there  will  soon  be  an 
end  both  of  the  priests  and  of  the  war.  Persecute 
them  as  a  class  and  you  will  have  both  priests  and  war 
for  a  thousand  years  to  come.  If  a  guilty  priest  is  pun- 
ished, as  a  priest,  the  inhabitants  are  shocked ;  if  he  is 
punished  as  a  citizen,  as  a  man,  no  one  says  a  word." 
"The  people  of  La  Vendee,"  said  Lamennais  very 
justly,  "  did  not  revolt  against  liberty.  I  love  to  re- 
gard La  Vendee  and  *the  republic  as  two  sisters 
who  combat,  simply  because  of  a  misunderstanding. 
The  one  represents  religious  liberty,  the  other  politi- 
cal liberty.  If  the  Revolution  had  left  to  La  Vendee 
her  priests  and  Churches  it  would  have  found  in  her  a 
warm  partisan.  The  spirit  of  La  Vendee  is  religious 
republicanism."  What  was  thus  true  of  La  Vendee 
was  true  of  all  France.  Unfortunately  the  revolution- 
ists, in  sacrificing  at  every  occasion  one  of  the  most 
sacred  of  liberties,  failed  to  see  that  they  were  rendering 
liberty  itself  hateful. 

On  the  1st  of  May,  1795,  a  proposed  decree,  very 
severe  against  the  priests  who  had  returned  to  France, 
was  introduced  into  the  Assembly.  It  contained  one 
article  which,  on  being  referred  to  a  committee,  gave 

3i 


266        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

occasion  to  an  important  report  by  Lanjuinais  some 
weeks  later.  In  the  short  debate. which  thereupon  en- 
sued the  cause  of  religious  liberty  triumphed,  and 
the  law  of  February  21st,  (3  Ventose,)  received  the 
most  happy  extension.  It  provided  that  the  national 
Churches  should  be  at  the  service  of  all  the  different 
worships  at  fixed  different  hours.  The  ministers  who 
wished  to  celebrate  worship  had  only  to  apply  for  per- 
mission, and  take  an  oath  of  submission  to  the  civil 
laws.  In  Sept  ember,  1795,  further  important  liberal 
measures  were  taken  in  regard  to  affairs  of  Church,  so 
that  on  the  whole  religious  liberty  would  have  been 
securely  guaranteed  had  not  other  measures  of  a  con- 
trary tendency  been  unfortunately  enacted. 

The  most  grave  of  these  measures  was  the  law  of  the 
Decade  Festivals,  the  atheistical  Sunday,  which  was  in 
fact  a  sly  attempt  to  undermine  Christianity  in  France 
It  was  Hebertism,  so  far  as  it  could  be  revived  after  the 
fall  of  Robespierre.  It  sought  its  object  in  an  indirect 
way,  and  substituted  influence  for  violence.  Its  authors, 
however,  did  not  attempt  to  conceal  their  design,  and 
the  Convention,  in  confiding  the  organization  of  the  fes- 
tivals to  the  Committee  of  Public  Instruction,  showed 
clearly  the  importance  it  attached  to  them.  It  was  an 
attempt  to  shape  the  public  spirit  in  a  different  mold. 
The  fixing  of  the  festivals  on  another  day  than  the 
Christian  Sunday,  revealed  a  spirit  of  hostility  to  relig- 
ion. This  is  clear  from  the  words  of  one  of  the  advo- 
cates of  the  law.  "  All  prejudices,"  said  he,  "  tend  to 
destroy  liberty,  and  the  most  dangerous  are  those  which 
,  are  founded  on  mystical  ideas;"  that  is,  religious  doc- 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  267 

trines.  But  how  to  destroy  them  was  the  question. 
Not  by  violence,  for  opinions  are  not  put  down  by 
force.  The  surest  method  of  opposing  a  dike  to  the 
prejudices  which  were  springing  up  afresh  in  France 
was  to  inaugurate  a  system  of  grand  and  pompous  na- 
tional festivals,  a  sort  of  republican  worship.  A  Dele- 
gate, writing  to  the  Convention  from  Joinville,  whither 
he  had  been  sent  on  business,  speaks  thus  against  the 
cause  of  religion :  "  We  must  have  a  remedy  which  will 
produce  a  radical  cure.  Such  a  one  exists  only  in  pub- 
lic instruction.  The  decade  festivals  offer  so  much  the 
better  an  opportunity,  because  instruction  will  then  take 
the  form  of  pleasure.  Lose  not  a  moment  in  organizing 
them."  Some  weeks  later  the  following  sentiments 
were  uttered  in  the  Legislature  :  "  Let  us  take  care ; 
even  as  the  superstition  which  we  replace  by  our  civic 
festivals  charmed- the  mind  and  heart  by  its  prestige,  so 
should  we  impress  on  our  festivals  a  grand  and  im- 
posing character,  in  order  the  more  effectually  to  destroy 
the  dangerous  illusions  of  fanaticism."  In  February, 
1795,  a  committee  exhorted  the  Convention  thus  :  "Tyr- 
anny and  superstition  have  desolated  the  earth ;  you 
ought  to  enlighten  its  ignorance.  Upon  the  ruins  of  all 
errors  you  ought  to  establish  the  dominion  of  the  truths 
of  nature,  by  founding  a  pure  worship,  to  be  celebrated 
under  the  open  heavens — the  sole  worship  worthy  of  the 
Supreme  Being  and  of  free  man." 

This,  as  well  as  all  previous  attempts  to  supplant  . 
Christianity,  was  destined  to  fall  into  impotence  and 
ridicule.    The  sentiment  of  the  Infinite,  alone,  is  capable 
of  founding  a  worship.    Outside  of  their  pleasures  and 


'  2G8        Religion  and  the  Eeign  of  Terror. 

interests,  men  assemble  and  form  unions  only  under  the 
influence  of  the  Divine.  They  can  never  be  brought 
together  and  moved  by  empty  abstractions.  Neither 
the  patriotic  hymns  nor  the  lectures  on  politics  and 
agriculture,  were  sufficient  to  conjure  the  incurable 
ennui  of  these  festivals  ;  the  people  grew  weary  even  of 
the  touching  spectacle  of  Old  Age  contrasting  with  Child- 
hood. The  solemn  Anniversary  of  Reproduction  tended 
somewhat  to  un wrinkle  the  brows ;  but  the  inevitable 
homily  on  the  rights  of  citizens  or  on  the  cultivation  of 
potatoes,  was  a  poor  substitute  for  those  sacred  texts  for 
which  the  soul  is  athirst,  and  in  which  it  finds  an  echo 
from  its  celestial  home.  The  Committee  of  Public  In- 
struction relied  much  on  the  civic  repasts ;  but  it  forgot 
that  all  the  attraction  of  these  depended  on  the  refresh- 
ments therewith  connected,  and  that  the  people  were 
wearied  to  death  of  the  republican  tirades.  Boissy 
d'Anglas,  it  is  true,  proposed  to  give  a  little  variety  to 
the  pleasures  of  the  day  by  presenting  a  symbolical 
rose  to  Innocence;  but  the  remedy  was  very  trifling. 
Of  these  festivals,  which  were  really  established  only 
under  the  Directory,  there  was  destined  to  remain  only 
the  remembrance  of  the  most  laughable  of  parodies. 
They  had  only  one  serious  result ;  they  gave  occasion 
to  infidel  fanaticism  to  interfere  with,  the  free  celebra- 
tion of  Christian  worship. 

One  of  the  chief  works  of  the  last  period  of  the  Con- 
vention was  the  elaboration  of  a  new  constitution.  The 
constitution  of  1793  had  become  the  platform  of  the 
Ultra-radical  or  Mountain  party,  a  platform  stained  with 
blood  and  crime,  and  whose  triumph  had  brought  the 


17 1 i igion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  269 


Reign  of  Terror.  It  was  in  the  name  of  this  constitu- 
tion that  the  national  representation  had  twice  been 
violated.  It  bore  the  imprint  of  the  hot  demagogy 
from  which  it  sprang.  It  had,  therefore,  now  become 
odious  to  a  nation  desirous  of  repose.  The  new  consti- 
tution was  the  work  of  the  Moderate  party,  and  was 
presented  in  the  Convention  by  Boissy  D'Anglas.  It 
was  easy  to  see  that  three  years  of  contest  had  over- 
turned many  a  revolutionary  prejudice.  Thus,  the  di- 
vision of  the  Legislature  into  an  upper  and  a  lower 
house,  so  disdainfully  rejected  by  the  Constituents  in 
17S9,  was  adopted  almost  without  opposition.  -  No  one 
protested  against  the  interdiction  of  great  popular  asso- 
ciations, which,  during  the  first  period  of  the  Revolution, 
had  formed  a  sort  of  permanent  demagogic  opposition 
to  the  regular  authorities.  There  was  no  desire  to  re- 
suscitate the  Club  of  the  Jacobins,  or  the  too  famous 
City  Council  of  Paris.  The  communal  assemblies  were 
replaced  by  administrative  boards  of  three  or  five 
members.  The  legislative  power  was  intrusted  to  two 
councils,  the  Anciens  and  the  Cinq-cents,  (the  senate 
and  the  Jive  hundred,)  and  the  executive  power  to  a  Di- 
rectory of  five  members  chcsen  by  the  councils. 

This  constitution,  of  which  we  give  but  the  general 
features,  was  far  better  than  its  predecessors,  though  it 
was  still  disfigured  by  grave  imperfections.  The  two 
councils  were  composed  of  elements  too  similar  to  se- 
cure a  real  counterpoise,  and  the  executive  power  was  a 
mere  commission  of  the  councils  which  was  destined  to 
struggle  continually  for  an  increase  of  its  power.  We 
will   soon   see  how  unfortunate  for  France  was  the 


270        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

regime  resulting  from  this  imperfect  constitution,  and 
from  the  lack  of  moral  honesty  in  the  rulers. 
.  As  to  religious  liberty,  the  new  constitution  asserted 
the  great  principles  which  had  triumphed  in  the  Con- 
vention after  the  fall  of  Robespierre.  It  contained  the 
words,  Every  one  is  free  in  the  exercise  of  his  worship. 
The  words,  The  republic  salaries  no  worship,  conse- 
crated one  of  the  most  precious  and  most  dearly  bought 
of  the  conquests  of  the  Revolution. 

The  adoption  of  the  constitution,  which  took  place 
August  17th,  1795,  changed  in  no  respect  the  con- 
dition of  the  unfortunate  non-juring  priests.  An  officer 
in  Haute  Loire,  who  had  suspended,  to  their  detriment, 
the  public  law,  was  justified  by  the  Convention.  It 
was  against  these  unhappy  men  that  it  directed  one  of 
its  very  last  acts.  After  the  riot  of  October  5th, 
which  had  been  occasioned  by  the  decision  of  the  Con- 
vention, that  two  thirds  of  its  members  should  have 
seats  in  the  new  councils,  it  passed,  on  motion  of  Tal- 
lien,  a  decree  which  excluded  from  public  functions 
every  ex-noble  and  every  individual  who  had  provoked 
or  sanctioned  illiberal  measures,  and  required  the  sum- 
mary execution  of  the  laws  against  the  refractory 
priests. 

Thus  closed  the  labors  of  this  great  and  terrible  As 
sembly,  which  had  sat  from  September  21st,  1792, 
to  October  the  26th,  1795.  It  had,  we  must  confess, 
saved  the  territory  of  France ;  but  for,  a  long  time,  it 
had  been  compromising  the  Revolution  by  rendering  it 
an  object  of  terror  to  the  world.  It  had  consecrated 
glorious  principles,  and  accomplished  admirable  works, 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  271 

but  it  had  left  the  nation  weary  and  demoralized. 
Despotic  in  the  extreme,  it  had  disgraced  its  last  hours 
by  one  of  those  measures  of  public  safety  which  so  often 
had  Led  it  to  crime,  and  which  had  been  more  pernicious 
to  liberty  than  all  the  united  forces  of  the  coalition. 
These  decrees  of  public  safety  were  destined  to  be  fol- 
lowed by  coups  detat;  for  the  road  for  usurpation  was 
already  well  prepared.  Such  must  be  the  fate  of  every 
Revolution  which,  by  putting  God  out  of  sight,  and 
trampling  under  foot  the  rights  of  conscience,  deprives 
itself  of  all  lasting  foundation  upon  which  to  build. 


272        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror, 


CHAPTER  II. 

RELATIONS  OF  CHURCH  AND  STATE  UNDER  THE 
DIRECTORY. 


The  constitution  of  the  year  III,  despite  its  imperfec- 
tions, might  have  given  liberty  and  peace  to  the  country ; 
for  in  the  two  free  legislative  councils  it  had  ample 
means  of  peacefully  correcting  itself.  But  woe  to  the 
country  which  in  its  impatience  destroys  this  pliable  in- 
strument of  reform  !  Respect  for  an  assembly,  however, 
is  closely  connected  with  respect  for  law,  and  the  latter 
depends  'on  the  moral  development  of  the  people.  Now 
the  fact  is,  that  from  the  first  outbreak  of  the  Revolu- 
tion France  had  never  been  so  deeply  demoralized  as  at 
this  time  under  the  Directory.  What  had  been  lacking 
in  1789  was  neither  enthusiasm  nor  generosity;  the 
Weak  point  lay  in  too  great  an  absence  of  those  inflexi- 
ble principles  which  are  derived  from  a  higher  sphere 
than  that  of  noble  human  impulses.  With  man  there  is 
no  absolute  stability  except  in  the  depths  of  the  con- 
science, where  the  moral  sentiment  is  blended  with  the 
voice  of  God.  It  is  well  known  to  what  extent  God 
was  absent  from  a  Revolution  which  was  born  of  the 
eighteenth  century.  When,  therefore,  after  years  of 
struggle  and  fatigue,  the  impulsion  of  enthusiasm  had 
died  away,  there  remained  in  the  hearts  of  the  nation  no 
firm  principle  which  could  serve  as  a  rock  to  break  the 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  273 

force  of  popular  or  governmental  passions.   The  country 
became  a  prey  to  insurrections  and  coups  aV'etat,  until 
finally  a  coup  oVetat,  better  planned  than  the  others 
gave  to  these  shameful  crises  the  merited  solution.  A 
lawless  republican  hypocrisy  characterized  this  sad 
epoch.    To  find  complete  sincerity  anywhere  outside  of 
the  ranks  of  the  priests  who  suffered  for  their  faith,  it 
was  necessary  to  descend  to  the  low  region  of  "  Grac- 
cus"  Babeuf  and  his  accomplices,  where  an  agrarian 
demagogue  cried  aloud  with  the  savage  ferocity  of  a 
famished  wild  beast.    The  Directory  contained  only 
two  good  men,  Carnot  and  Barthelemy,  but  it  soon  rid 
itself  of  this  anomaly.    The  other  three  were  Barras* 
Rewbell,  and  La  Reveilliere  Lepaux.    Barras  was  the 
leading  spirit,  and  united  in  his  character  the  vices  of 
the  aristocracy  and  the  insatiable  thirsts  of  demagogy ; 
Kewbell  was  the  politician,  and  La  Reveilliere  Lepaux 
attempted  to  play  the  apostle  in  the  name  of  his  ridicu- 
lous and  intolerant  Theophilanthropy.    It  'is  easy  to  fore- 
see what  would  become  of  the  government  in  the  hands 
of  such  men,  surrounded  as  they  were  by  a  sycophantic 
courtier  crowd,  who  saw  no  better  means  of  flattering 
them  than  to  improve  on  their  vices.    In  the  interior 
there  was  but  one  policy,  the  arbitrary.    They  resorted 
but  little  to  the  guillotine,  for  France  was  tired  of  that 
but  they  were  as  daring  in  their  contempt  of  law  as  the 
Committee  of  Public  Safety  in  the  worst  days  of  terror 
Abroad,  the  Directory  showed  itself  to  be  lacking  in 
good  faith  and  moderation,  and  exceedingly  unskillful  in 
negotiation.    It  had  the  happiness  of  discovering  the 

*  See  Appendix,  note  37. 
35 


274        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

greatest  captain  of  modern  times ;  it  could  depend  on 
the  sword  of  Bonaparte,  however,  only  until  he  had  ac- 
quired glory  enough,  to  justify  him  in  despising  its 
orders.  Under  the  command  of  this  incomparable  gen- 
eral the  French  manifested  the  wonderful  aptitudes  of 
their  genius  for  rapidly  and  skillfully  conducted  wars  of 
conquest ;  but  all  of  these  triumphs  did  not  remedy  the 
abjectness  and  poverty  of  their  civil  and  moral  life. 
With  few  exceptions,  no  great  citizens  were  produced  in 
these  armies  which  drove  Europe  before  them.  Most 
of  the  generals  who  had  distinguished  themselves  in 
battle  showed,  when  they  returned  home,  a  sneering 
contempt  for  right,  and  were  ready,  like  Pichegru  and 
Augereau,  to  become  the  instruments  of  betraying  and 
oppressing  the  republic.  The  young  Corsican  hero, 
who  had  already  fixed  upon  himself  all  eyes,  and  won 
all  prestige,  was  beginning  to  manifest  in  his  dealings 
with  the  parties,  and  in  his  negotiations  with  princes, 
that  total  absence  of  conviction,  that  contempt  of  right, 
that  deep  shrewdness  which  'is  moderate  by  calculation, 
and  resorts  to  violence  as  soon  as  that  will  better  serve 
the  purpose — in  fact  all  those  qualities  of  force  and 
cunning  which,  together,  made  him  so  dear  and  so  fatal 
to  France.  Has  he  not  given  a  full  portrait  of  himself 
in  the  following  confidential  words,  which  he  wrote  in 
reference  to  the  coup  cVetat  of  Fructidor,  (4th  of  Sep- 
tember, 1797,)  by  which  the  Directory  violated  the 
membership  of  the  Legislative  Councils  ?  "  Firmness," 
said  he,  "  would  have  sufficed.  Let  force  be  used  when 
one  cannot  get  along  without  it ;  but  when  one  has  the 
alternative,  justice  is  preferable."    No,  military  glory, 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  275 

the  natural  lot  of  a  brilliant  and  energetic  race,  a  glory 
.which  should  be  ennobled  by  a  defense  of  liberty,  con- 
stitutes in  and  of  itself  none  of  the  true  attributes'  of  a 
great  nation.  There  was  reason,  for  awhile,  to  hope  that 
the  moderate  and  liberal  opinion  which  was  represented 
in  the  councils,  and  which  manifested  itself  among  the 
people  as  often  as  the  ballot-box  was  respected,  would 
rescue  the  country.  But,  unfortunately,  too  many  of 
the.  chiefs  in  the  government  lacked  honesty  of  purpose, 
and  were  ready  to  plot  with  the  Directory  against  the 
republic. 

It  was  the  question  of  religion  upon  which  took  place 
the  most  violent  shock  between  the  liberty-loving  party 
(which  was  composed  of  the  newly  elected  third  of  the 
two  Councils,  together  with  the  Moderates  who  had  be- 
longed to  the  Convention)  and  the  violent  party,  the 
latter  consisting  of  the  majority  both  in  the  Councils 
and  in  the  Directory.    All  who  did  not  desire  to  keep 
the  country  in  a  continual  state  of  revolution  were  very 
anxious  to  avoid  troubling  the  conscience  of  the  people. 
Worship  had  been  revived  throughout  the  land,  and  it 
was  easy  to  see  how  indestructible  is  the  religious  senti- 
ment.   Simple  common  sense  was  enough  to  enable  all 
who  were  honest  to  see  that  the*  best  policy  was  to 
leave  religion  to  itself,  and  to  repeal  all  persecuting 
laws.    The  way  to  this  course  was  open,  since  the  Con- 
vention had  dissolved  the  union  of  Church  and  State. 
There  was  no  surer  way  of  rallying  to  the  new  govern- 
ment the  religiously-inclined  inhabitants  of  the  West 
and  South,  and  of  defeating  the  intrigues  of  the  emi- 
grated royalists,  who  had  no  better  card  in  their  hands 


276        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

than  republican  intolerance.  Such  was  the  favorite 
policy  of  the  moderate  minority  in  the  Councils,  and 
multitudes  of  petitions  for  the  same  course  of  policy 
were  sent  by  the  people  to  the  Council  of  the  Five 
Hundred.  But  the  majority  of  the  Councils  and  of  the 
Directory  were  far  from  sincerely  respecting  the  liberty 
of  worship.  The  pure  Jacobins,  like  Barras  and  Rew- 
bell,  hated  religion  in  itself,  and  regarded  the  God  of 
ancient  France,  as  well  as  the  Supreme  Being  of  Robes- 
pierre, as  among  the  phantoms  which  had  definitively 
vanished  before  the  sunlight  of  revelation.  They  had 
no  patience  for  doctrines  which  threw  an  unfavorable 
light  over  the  future  of  the  impious.  We  have  already 
mentioned  that  La  Reveillere  Lepaux  had  his  own  spe- 
cial divinity  to  protect.  He  was  a  philosophical  invent- 
or of  religion ;  that  is  to  say,  he  belonged  to  the  class 
of  the  most  intolerant.  To  make  place  for  a  ridiculous 
worship  which  he  patronized,  he  was  ready  to  overturn 
every  rival  altar.  But  he  had  little  confidence  in  the 
attractive  power  of  that  sentimental  pastoral  system 
which  he  wished  to  substitute  for  the  worship  of  the 
God  of  the  Bible ;  he  relied  much  more  on  measures 
of  proscription  than  on  the  flower  garlands  and  the 
bowls  of  milk — those  touching  symbols  of  his  new  sys- 
tem of  Theophilanthropy.  Every  thing  indicated  that 
there  would  be  a  violent  struggle  between  the  Moderate 
party,  which  honestly  desired  liberty  of  worship,  and 
the  Directory,  which  desired  violently  to  deprive  France 
of  her  ancient  religion. 

Scarcely  had  the  two  Councils  passed,  in  August, 
1796,  a  law  against  the  extreme  Jacobins  on  the  one 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  277 

/mud,  and  the  royalists  on  the  other,  when  an  abomina- 
ble decree  against  the  refractory  priests  was  presented. 
The  extremists  seemed  to  wish  to  punish  these  men  for 
a  crime  which  was  no  longer  possible,  inasmuch  as  the 
Church  regime,  to  which  they  had  formerly  refused 
assent,  had  months  ago  been  abolished.  The  simple 
fact  is,  they  wished  to  persecute  for  the  mere  pleas- 
ure of  the  thing.  The  reporting  and  discussion  of 
the  decree  were  accompanied  by  exhibitions  of  the 
most  hideous  and  unjustifiable  passions.  The  law 
itself  required  that  every  refractory  priest,  that  is,  the 
majority  in  the  country,  should  leave  France  within 
twenty  days  on  pain  of  being  treated  as  a  returned  emi- 
grant, that  is,  condemned  to  death.  Such  a  law  was 
among  the  most  infamous  violations  of  conscience  that 
had  yet  been  attempted.  The  debate  which  it  excited 
was  very  lively.  '  The  radicals  objected  to  an  exception 
which  it  made  in  favor  of  priests  of  over  sixty  years. 
"These  old,  gray-headed  priests,"  said  one  of  the  orators, 
"  inspire  all  the  more  respect,  exert  a  greater  influence ; 
their  blessings  are  more  highly  prized.  The  women 
adore  these  grand  lamas,  these  aged  idols,  and  the 
wives  react  on  their  husbands;  hence  the  greater  evil." 
Despite  the  earnest  efforts  of  the  partisans  of  modera- 
tion, the  decree,  in  its  worst  form,  was  voted  by  the 
Council  of  the  Five  Hundred.  On  being  presented, 
however,  to  the  Ancients,  or  Senate,  it  was  delayed,  and 
finally  rejected. 

The  attitude  of  the  Directory  to  the  Holy  See  re- 
vealed the  same  violent  and  imprudent  conduct  which 
marked  its  home  policy.    General  Bonaparte,  after  his 


278        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

first  victories  in  Italy,  had  decided  to  treat  with  the 
Italian  governments,  so  as  not  to  have  enemies  in  his 
.  rear  whom  he  was  not  yet  able  to  conquer.  For  this 
purpose  he  entered  into  conference  with  a  Court  which 
had  thus  far  been  the  bitterest  enemy  of  the  French 
Revolution.  The  young  general  was  too  consummate  a 
politician  to  insist  on  conditions  which  could  not  be 
obtained,  in  a  negotiation  which  he  was  personally  in- 
terested in  concluding.  On  condition  of  respecting,  in 
some  degree,  the  dominions  of  the  Pope,  he  obtained 
one  hundred  precious  paintings  and  statues  for  the 
museums  of  Paris,  besides  a  large  supply  of  provisions 
and  money. 

Bonaparte  was  much  displeased  at  the  conduct  of  the 
Directory  after  the  armistice  which  he  had  concluded  at 
Bologna  in  June,  1796.    The  Pope  accorded  without 
delay  the  sacrifice  of  sums  of  money,  which  he  was  then 
poorly  prepared  to  sustain,  and  parted  cheerfully  with  his 
treasures  of  art.    But  he  could  not  accept  the  new  con- 
ditions which  were  pressed  upon  him  by  the  Directory. 
This  body  required  him  to  retract  the  briefs  in  which  he 
had  condemned  the  Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy. 
This  was  most  unreasonable.    As  temporal  prince  he 
might  make  sacrifices,  but  as  head  of  the  Church  he 
could  not,  without  dishonor,  submit  a  doctrinal  decision 
to  the  fluctuations  of  politics.    The  Directory  had  thus 
offended,  and  put  in  question  the  interests  of,  the  whole 
Catholic  Church.    It  was  aiming  to  impose  on  the  chief 
of  the  Church  the  same  tyranny  which  had  been  at- 
tempted against  the  conscience  of  the  non-juring  clergy. 
In  this  it  is  easy  to  recognize  the  imbecile  presumption 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  279 

of  a  sectary  like  La  Reveilliere  Lepaux.*  The  Pope, 
though  sick  at  the  time,  convened  his  Consistory.  It 
was  decided  unanimously  that  he  could  not  grant  the 
demands  of  the  Directory  without  essentially  compro- 
mising the  interests  of  religion.  The  unhappy  Pope  ex- 
claimed, in  view  of  his  troubles,  M  We  regard  the  crown 
of  martyrdom  as  of  higher  worth  than  that  which  we 
wear  on  our  head."  It  was  well  understood  at  Rome 
that  the  Directory  desired  war,  since  it  had  asked  what 
could  not  be  granted.  The  Papal  States  were,  there- 
fore, put  in  a  state  of  defense,  though  against  all  hope 
of  success.  Bonaparte,  who  had  not  yet  won  enough 
victories  to  despise  the  authority  of  the  Directory,  wrote 
in  a  tone  of  great  harshness  to  this  easily- frightened 
court  of  old  men.  He  enumerated  his  victories,  and 
threatened  to  crown  them  with  the  overthrow  of  the 
Papal  power.  Indirectly,  however,  through  the  media- 
tion of  Cardinal  Mattei,  he  acted  in  a  conciliatory  spirit. 
The  latter  replied  with  great  dignity  to  his  haughty 
demands :  "  Sire,  your  prosperity  and  successes  have 
blinded  you.  Not  content  with  having  shorn  to  the 
skin  the  flock,  you  now  wish  to  devour  them.  You  re- 
quire that  the  Pope  shall  sacrifice  both  his  own  and  the 
souls  of  those  who  are  confided  to  him.  You  would 
destroy  the  foundation  of  the  Christian  religion.  Con- 
sternated at  this  preposterous  demand,  the  Holy  Father 
has  fled  to  the  bosom  of  God  for  wisdom  in  this  time  of 
need.  Doubtless  the  Holy  Spirit  will  enlighten  him, 
and  remind  him  of  the  example  of  the  martyrs."  These 
were  noble  words. 

*  See  Appendix,  note  38. 


280        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

The  victories  won  over  the  wretched  Papal  troops 
conferred  little  glory,  and  Bonaparte  hastened  to  con- 
clude a  peace,  in  spite  of  the  angry  suggestions  of  the 
Directory,  who  desired  above  all  things  the  overthrow 
of  the  Papacy.  In  a  dispatch  from  Paris  to  the  general 
of  the  army  of  Italy,  under  date  of  February,  1797,  we 
find  the  following  words :  "  You  have  too  much  expe- 
rience in  politics  not  to  have  felt  as  deeply  as  we  that 
the  Roman  religion  will  always  be  the  irreconcilable 
enemy  of  the  republic.  The  Directory  invites  you  to 
do  all  that  may  seem  to  you  possible,  without  rekin- 
dling the  fires  of  fanaticism,  to  destroy  the  Papal  govern- 
ment, either  by  putting  Rome  under  another  power,  or, 
which  will  perhaps  be  better,  by  establishing  for  it  a 
form  of  government  which  will  render  the  yoke  of  the 
priests  contemptible  and  odious."  There  could  be  no 
more  frank  an  avowal  of  a  design  in  the  Directory  to 
make  war  against  an  opinion,  a  doctrine ;  but  Bonaparte 
knew  too  well  the  danger  of  a  premature  overthrow  of 
the  Papal  throne.  He,  therefore,  waved  matters  of  doc- 
trine, and  on  the  17th  of  February,  1797,  signed  with 
the  Papal  power  a  treaty  of  peace.  By  this  treaty  of 
Tolentino  the  Pope  abandoned  Bologna,  Ferrara,  and 
Romagna,  renounced  his  claims  on  Avignon,  made  a 
large  contribution  of  military  supplies,  and  yielded 
many  precious  objects  of  art. 

The  elections  of  1797  had  fortified  in  the  government 
the  party  of  moderation.  Several  of  the  new  delegates, 
such  as  Camille  Jordan*  and  Royer  Collard, \  were 
strangers  to  the  violent  measures  of  the  Revolution. 
*  See  Appendix,  note  39.  f  Ibid.,  note  40. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  281 

They  were  especially  strangers  to  antireligious  passions, 
and  represented  constituents  who  were  attached  to  Chi  is- 
tianity,  and  more  and  more  weary  of  the  intolerance  of 
the  Directory.     The  legislative  session  began  with  a 
revision  of  the  revolutionary  laws.     On  the  13th  of 
June,  a  report  was  made  which  complained  loudly  of 
the  neglect  into  which  education  had  fallen.    An  in- 
creasing number  of  parents  refused  to  send  their  chil- 
dren to  schools  which  were  under  infidel  auspices. 
Camille  Jordan  became  the  organ  of  the  complaints 
which  were  every-where  made  against  the  infractions  of 
the  liberty  of  worship.    He  pronounced  a  memorable 
discourse  in  favor  of  indiscriminate  liberty  of  conscience 
for  all  citizens,  and  feared  not  to  borrow  arguments  from 
the  excellency  of  Christianity.    "Be  not  astonished," 
said  he,  "  at  the  importance  attached  to  religious  ideas 
by  men  who  are  accustomed  to  find  in  them  the  nourish- 
ment of  their  souls.    It  is  from  them  that  they  derive 
joys  which  are  independent  of  the  power  of  man  or  the 
strokes  of  fate.   A  need  of  these  consolations  is  especially 
felt  in  times  of  revolution ;  then  it  is  that  the  unhappy 
have  great  need  of  hope.    Religion  lights  up  the  house  • 
of  mourning,  and  even  dispels  the  night  of  the  grave. 
Legislators,  how  small  are  your  benefits  compared  to 
this.    For  you  it  is  an  unspeakable  advantage  that 
religion  exists.    It  exerts  a  powerful  influence  ;  it  alone 
speaks  efficaciously  of  morality  to  the  people ;  it  pre- 
pares your  work ;  it  could  accomplish  it  without  your 
help.    Laws  are  but  the  supplement  of  the  ethics  of 
nations.    If  you  desire  to  erect  a  dike  against  the  fear- 
ful progress  of  crime  and  disorder,  you  must  guarantee- 

36 


282        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

complete  religious  liberty."  Jordan  then  proceeded  in 
the  most  reasonable  manner  to  explain  in  detail  how 
this  liberty  should  be  respected.  He  insisted  with  em- 
phasis on  the  absurdity  of  the  decree  forbidding  the 
priests  to  assemble  the  people  for  worship  by  the  ring- 
ing of  bells.  "Why,"  said  he  ironically,  "  shall' we  op- 
pose a  superstition  of  philosophy  to  the  superstition 
which  attaches  the  women  of  our  villages  to  the  sound 
of  their  parish  bells  ?  "  From  the  time  of  the  Atheist 
delirium  of  Chaumette  funeral  ceremonies  had  been  sub- 
jected to  impious  or  ridiculous  regulations.  "  Yes,  I 
can  conceive,"  said  the  orator  with  noble  emotions,  "  I 
can  conceive  why  those  tyrants  who  covered  France 
with  grave-yards  desired  to  despoil  them  of  solemnity ; 
why  they  threw,  with  so  little  decency,  the  last  remains 
of  man  into  an  ignoble  ditch.  They  felt  a  necessity  of 
despising  humanity,  and  of  smothering  those  generous 
sentiments  whose  revival  would  be  to  them  so  terrible." 

This  discourse  was  a  marked  event.  It  excited  the 
rage  of  the  remnants  of  the  Jacobins.  The  final  discus- 
sion of  the  matter  took  place  two  months  later,  July 
8th,  1797.  General  Jordan  opened  the  opposition  on 
the  part  of  the  extreme  revolutionists,  by  a  most  violent 
speech  against  the  proposed  modification  of  the  perse- 
cuting laws.  He  regarded  the  influence  of  religion  as 
evil  and  only  evil.  But  Boissy  D'Anglas,  skeptic  as  he 
was,  stood  up  for  the  cause  of  justice.  In  the  midst  ot 
this  discussion  was  heard  the  grave  voice  of  a  young 
Deputy,  who  was  destined  to  exert  for  long  years  on 
the  liberal  party  a  telling  influence.  Royer  Collard 
made  his  debut  at  the  tribune  in  the  defense  of  the 


*    Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  283 

noblest  of  causes.  One  finds  in  this  first  discourse  that 
austere  vigor,  that  masterly  breadth  which  were  so 
characteristic  of  him,  and  which  sometimes  ran  the  risk  * 
of  losing  something  of  force  by  too  much  of  abstract- 
ness.  He  showed  very  forcibly  that  the  religious  senti- 
ment had  proved  itself  superior  to  all  the  violence  of 
the  Revolution;  that  it  had  existed  in  France  from 
before  the  foundation  of  the  monarchy,  and  had  now 
survived  its  downfall;  and  that  to  persecute  it  could 
only  bring  ruin  upon  the  persecutors.  He  closed  with 
these  admirable  words :  "  Justice,  Confidence,  Generos- 
ity, you  who  are  so  much  decried  by  tyranny,  you  are 
not  only  the  noblest  sentiments  of  the  human  soul,  you 
constitute  also  the  most  philosophic  principle  of  govern- 
ment, the  wisest  combination  of  politics,  the  profoundest 
diplomacy.  To  the  savage  voice  of  demagogy,  crying 
out,  Audacity,  more  audacity,  audacity  still ;  let  us  re- 
spond by  this  consolatory  and  victorious  cry,  which 
will  find  an  echo  throughout  the  nation :  Justice,  more 
justice,  justice  still."  The  Assembly,  by  a  strong  ma- 
jority, repealed  the  most  of  the  intolerant  laws  which 
yet  disgraced  the  .code  of  France.  Liberty  of  con- 
science obtained  a  signal  triumph,  and  would  have  borne 
the  happiest  fruits  had  it  not  been  suddenly  checked  by 
the  coup  d'etat  of  September  the  4th,  (18  Fructidor,) 
in  which  the  Directory,  backed  by  military  influence, 
triumphed  over  liberty,  and  violated  the  persons  of  the 
national  representation.  It  is  certain  that  one  of  the 
principal  causes  of  this  act  of  usurpation  was  the  legis- 
lative re-establishment  of  the  liberty  of  worship. 

It  is  not  our  business  to  treat  of  the  circumstances  of 


2  Si        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

this  monstrous  conspiracy.  This  violation  of  the  Na- 
tional Legislature,  so  coolly  plotted  by  the  holders  of 
power,  was  infinitely  more  guilty  than  any  popular  in- 
surrection. The  combination  of  cool  stratagem  and 
violence,  renders  the  crime  the  more  odious.  We  will 
throw  a  veil  over  these  ill-fated  days,  when  a  drunken 
soldiery  made  a  mock  of  the  right  they  were  trampling 
under  foot,  and  rejDeated  without  blushing  the  sentiment 
that  the  saber  was  the  law.  These  events  are  a  shame 
to  the  armies  which  countenanced  them,  and  the  country 
which  endured  them.  The  victims  alone  came  out  pure 
and  glorious.  The  majority  of  the  generals  applauded 
the  coup  d'etat  of  Fructidor;  the  reserve  of  Bonaparte 
was  simply  a  phase  of  his  ambitious  calculations.  It 
was  simply  the  criticism  of  a  consummate  player  on  an 
ill-combined  move,  and  not  the  indignation  of  a  friend 
of  liberty.  The  coup  d'etat  had  no  plausible  pretext. 
The  Council  of  the  Five  Hundred  desired  to  return  to 
measures  of  moderation ;  the  Directory  wished  to  con- 
tinue the  regime  of  revolutionary  violence.  The  ques- 
tion was,  whether  the  republic  should  become  liberal,  or 
whether  it  should  continue  in  an  arbitrary  course,  which, 
as  under  the  ancient  regime,  trampled  under  foot,  on 
pretext  of  State  necessity,  all  the  principles  of  right. 
The  act  of  violence  was  a  victory  of  revolutionary  dic- 
tatorship over  reviving  liberty.  If  it  did  not  shed  blood 
it  was  none  the  less  cruel,  for  the  banishment  which  it  in- 
flicted on  its  victims  was  nothing  else  than  a  condemna- 
tion to  death — a  long  torture.  From  that  day  the  republic 
was  lost.  The  unjust  and  immoral  Directory,  which  as- 
sumed to  represent  it,  could  not  even  maintain  public 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  285 

order.  Preoccupied  with  the  desire  of  remaining  in 
power,  it  compromised  the  country.  Accustomed  to 
moderation  in  nothing,  it  rendered  peace  impossible, 
and  broke  the  treaty  of  Campo  Formio  when  it  was 
scarcely  concluded.  With  the  finest  armies  and  best 
generals  in  the  world,  it  lost  the  fruits  of  many  victories, 
because  it  was  guided  in  its  choice  of  officers  solely  by 
the  desire  of  rewarding  its  creatures,  and  of  getting  rid 
of  its  rivals.  Nothing  but  the  unhoped-for  stroke  of 
fortune  in  the  victory  of  Massena,  in  1799,  over  Suwar- 
row  at  Zurich,  averted  a  great  disaster.  The  brilliant 
but  sterile  expedition  of  Egypt,  after  having  served  the 
interests  of  the  Directors,  who  were  disquieted  at  the 
proximity  of  the  eclipsing  glory  of  the  Corsican,  turned 
in  the  end  to  the  profit  of  that  absorbing  personality, 
who  soon  possessed  himself  of  all  the  forces  of  the 
nation.  The  Directory  could  preserve  the  fruits  of  the 
Fructido'r  coup  cV'etat  only  by  a  series  of  similar  and 
equally  disgraceful  strokes  of  policy.    The  elections  of 

1798,  which  had  sent  to  the  Councils  a  large  number  of 
Moderates  and  Liberals,  were  annulled  by  an  infamous 
decree.  It  was  in  vain  that  the  Directory  multiplied  its 
arbitrary  measures,  suspended  the  liberty  of  the  press, 
and  practiced  the  search  of  private  houses.  The  coun- 
try was  tired  of  such  a  system.    The  new  elections,  in 

1799,  gave  a  majority  in  both  Councils  against  the 
Directory. 

La  Reveilliere  Lepaux  and  Merlin  submitted  to  the 
opposition,  and  retired  from  the  Directory.  Sieves  be- 
came the  leading  spirit.  But  soon,  new  disappointment 
was  felt.    The  new  Councils  enacted  the  abominable  law 


286        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

of  hostages,  which  made  the  relatives  of  the  emigrated 
or  suspected  responsible  for  intrigues  over  which  they 
had  no  control.  In  reality,  the  opposition  to  the  Di- 
rectory came  not  so  much  from  the  Moderate  party 
which  had  been  decimated  in  Fructidor,  as  from  the 
disappointed  Jacobins.  It  was  not  a  collision  of  princi- 
ples, but  of  ambitions.  The  country  was  weary  of 
strifes  of  which  it  was  always  the  Tictim,  and  was, 
therefore,  ready  to  surrender  itself  to  whoever  would 
give  it  repose.  Sieves  aspired  to  this  role  of  pacifica- 
tor, but  was  forced  to  take  a  secondary  place  as  soon 
as  Bonaparte  had  landed  in  France.  The  conqueror  at 
the  Pyramids,  was  admirably  prepared  for  entering  into 
the  situation,  and  profiting  by  it.  He  possessed  the 
prestige  of  glory,  a  genius  for  administration  as  well  as 
for  war,  the  gift  of  winning  hearts,  and  besides  was  des- 
titute of  principles  which  could  interfere  with  his  un- 
measured but  profoundly-calculating  ambition. 

The  coup  d'etat  of  the  10th  of  November,  1799,  (18 
Brumaire,)  which  overthrew  the  Directory,  put  Bona- 
parte in  command  of  the  army,  and  made  him  First 
Consul,  was  the  merited  solution  of  the  crisis  of  Fructi- 
dor. It  was  not  so  much  a  deliverance  as  a  chastise- 
ment with  glorious  compensations.  But  these  compen- 
sations were  soon  to  be  lost;  for  the  moderation  which 
alone  could  preserve  them  was  incompatible  with  the 
ardent  genius  of  him  who  showed  himself  on  the  very 
day  of  his  triumph  unwilling  to  accept  the  restraint  of 
moral  law.  I  know  of  nothing  more  sad  in  all  modern 
history  than  the  scenes  which  preceded  this  fatal  date :  the 
conspirators  vying  with  each  other  in  violating  the  na- 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  287 


«?ional  representation,  and  adjourning  its  sittings  to  St. 
Cloud,  that  its  dying  voice  might  awaken  no  echo  in 
Paris, — the  Legislature  itself,  unable  to  cast  honor  on 
its  defeat,  and  speaking  only  the  noisy  language  of  the 
Clubs,  when  it  should  have  resounded  with  senatorial 
utterances  of  right,  —  General  Bonaparte  stammering 
at  the  Tribune  of  the  Five  Hundred,  and  trembling 
before  the  obscured  image  of  liberty  until  he  gave  the 
concerted  sisrnal  of  rescue  to  his  £n-enadiers, — aU  °f  this 
in  the  name  of  the  principles  of  1789, — what  a  pitiable 
comedy  to  introduce  an  epopee !  Happy  the  people 
which  has  not  seen  and  reseen  similar  spectacles ! 
Vaunt  as  much  as  you  please  the  order  established  in 
the  finances  and  on  the  highways — celebrate  the  miracle 
of  Marengo — but  go  not  further,  and  ask  us  not  to  ap- 
plaud this  violent  act  of  Bonaparte,  as  the  triumphant 
conclusion  of  the  French  Revolution.  "  Our  fathers 
died  in  other  hopes." 

Afl  to  the  attitude  of  the  Directory  to  religious  liberty 
during  the  two  years  and  two  months  which  intervened 
between  its  act  of  violence  against  the  National  Legisla- 
ture and  its  overthrow  in  the  usurpation  of  Bonaparte  in 
November,  1799,  little  need  be  said,  except  that  it  was 
intensely  intolerant.  It  seemed  to  have  nothing  so  mucli 
at  heart  as  to  have  the  late  liberal  laws  repealed,  and  to 
inaugurate  anew  the  severest  measures  against  the  refrac- 
tory priests,  that  is,  those  who  persisted  in  loyalty  to 
their  convictions.  In  his  message  to  the  subservient, 
mutilated  Legislature,  the  Theophilanthropist  Director, 
La  Reveilliere  Lepaux,  stigmatized  in  these  words,  the 
laws  on  liberty  of  conscience  which  had  recently  been 


288        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

voted  by  the  national  representatives :  "  Superstition 
and  fanaticism,"  said  he,  "  have  been  called  back  by  the 
very  persons  who,  under  the  monarchy,  had  contributed 
to  destroy  them."  An  oath  was  now  required  of 
priests,  which  contained,  in  addition  to  a  promise  of 
submission  to  the  laws,  a  declaration  of  hatred  to  all 
royalty.  About  two  hundred  priests,  together  with  the 
fifty-three  arrested  moderatist  representatives,  were  de- 
ported to  the  swamps  of  Sinnamari.  Almost  all  of 
them  died  in  a  few  months.  In  France  the  persecution 
was  renewed  with  vigor.  Search  of  private  houses 
was  instituted,  and  priests  were  again  crowded  together 
in  the  prisons  and  on  the  galleys.  Genissieu  proposed 
to  treat  as  emigrants  all  priests  subject  to  deportation 
who  should  not  forthwith  present  themselves  for  punish- 
ment. M  These  eternal  enemies  of  our  laws  and  tran- 
quillity," said  he,  "  must  be  taught  that  death  awaits 
them  if  they  dare  to  remain  on  our  territory."  This 
proposition  was  received  and  referred  to  a  committee. 
A  fraction  of  the  Legislature  would  have  willingly  ex- 
tended the  deportation  to  all  priests  whatever. 

It  was  not  simply  as  factions  that  the  priests  were 
persecuted,  but  as  the  ministers  of  a  hated  religion. 
The  institution  of  the  tenth-day  festivals  furnished  a 
ready  pretext  for  vexing  the  adherents  of  Christianity. 
Representative  Duhot,  who  for  his  ardent  and  bitter 
zeal  against  the  Sabbath  deserves  the  title  of  Knight  of 
the  Decades,  caused  to  be  passed  in  November,  1798,  a 
decree  which  rendered  the  observance  of  the  Atheist 
festivals  obligatory.  The  Jacobins  of  the  Five  Hun- 
dred, not  content  with  exacting  the  celebration  of  these 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  289 

days,  desired  also  the  formal  interdiction  of  the  observ- 
ance of  the  Sabbath.    But  this  was  rejected  on  the  ob- 
servation of  a  few  Deputies,  that  this  would  place 
France  below  the  States  of  the  Church  in  point  01 
religious  liberty.    Duhot  observed  that  "the  closing  of 
the  shops  was  the  exterior  sign  of  a  worship;"  he 
therefore  concluded  that  the  observance  of  the  Sabbath 
was  an  infraction  of  the  laws  of  the  country.    "  What  " 
cried  he  with  astonishment,  "weeks  after  the  great 
priest  of  Home,  long  assaulted  by  philosophy,  and  now 
dethroned  by  your  armies,  has  been  obliged  to  carry 
from  place  to  place  his  vagabond  piety,  do  his  servants 
dare  still  to  exercise  among  us  their  insolent  despotism ! 
Yes,  they  forbid  to  labor  on  the  Sabbath,  and  hinder 
Catholic  laborers  from  working  in  the  shops  on  that 
day."    Such  discourses  show  to  what  degradation  the 
French  tribune  had  fallen.    The  Assembly  took  into 
serious  consideration  a  proposition  to  transfer  to  the 
tenth  days  all  the  religious  festivals,  and  sent  with  ap- 
probation to  a  committee  a  motion  forbidding  the  clos- 
ure of  shops  on  the  sacred  days  of  the  Church.  A 
decree  was  demanded  which  should  severely  punish  any 
disrespect  shown  to  the  tenth-day  festivals.    An  effort 
was  also  made  to  forbid  fairs  on  these  days,  in  order  to 
^hock  the  religious  sentiment  by  forcing  them  upon  the 
Sabbath.     A  Deputy  was  found  who  even  proposed 
that  legal  protection  should  be  granted  only  to  such 
merchants  as  would  take  oath  to  use  exclusively  the 
new  republican  weights  and  measures,  and  to  keep  their 
stores  open  on  the  Sabbath.    Thus  one  would  have  had 
the  beautiful  spectacle  of  non-jurors  of  the  shop  as  well 

37  1 


290        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 


as  of  the  temple.  Even  this  was  not  enough.  An  ob- 
scure Deputy  demanded  that  instead  of  counting  past 
ages  from  the  birth  of  Christ,  they  should  be  reckoned 
backward  from  the  foundation  of  the  Republic.  All  of 
these  odious  propositions  were  heard  and  referred  to  a 
committee  which  would  certainly  have  caused  them  to 
be  converted  into  law,  had  not  the  storm  of  Brumaire 
and  the  usurpation  of  Bonaparte  swept  them  away. 

Moreover,  the  violent  party  were  well  able  to  bear  in 
patience  the  slow  process  of  legislation,  for  the  Direc- 
tory aided  them  and  practiced  in  the  whole  country  a 
vexatious  and  cruel  persecution.  In  the  fall  of  1797 
Gregory  had  complained  of  a  circular  of  Gohier,  the 
Minister  of  the  Interior,  which  required  the  clergymen 
of  all  Churches  to  transfer  to  the  tenth  days  the  cele- 
bration of  their  worship.  "How  many  unhappy  priests," 
exclaims  Gregory  in  his  Memoirs,  "have  been  pur- 
sued, imprisoned,  and  transported  beyond  the  seas,  for 
having  refused  to  obey  the  orders  of  municipalities  and 
administrations,  requiring  them  to  transfer  their  divine 
rites  to  the  tenth  days  ! "  It  is  easy  to  imagine  to 
what  a  height  measures  of  this  character,  which  affected 
the  most  minute  details  of  daily  life,  and  were  continu- 
ally repeated,  must  have  wounded  and  exasperated  the 
religious  sentiment. 

The  events  which  had  just  taken  place  in  Italy  were 
of  a  nature  to  give  the  climax  to  the  discontent  and 
indignation  of  all  friends  of  Catholicism.  The  treaty  of 
Tolentino  with  the  Holy  Father,  had  proved  to  be  only 
a  truce.  Doubtless  it  would  have  been  otherwise  had 
Bonaparte  remained  in  Italy.    The  Directory,  free  from 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  291 


all  control  after  their  coup  cVetat  of  Fructidor,  1797, 
pursued  with  ardor  their  favorite  plan  of  overthrowing 
the  Papacy.  They  began  openly  to  favor  the  revolu- 
tionary party  at  Rome.  General  Dnphot,  Embassador 
of  the  Republic  to  Rome,  had  been  killed  in  a  riot, 
though  it  has  never  been  known  whether  he  had  striven 
to  calm  or  to  invite  it.  This  furnished  the  desired 
occasion  for  rupture.  General  Berthier  marched  into 
Rome  in  February,  1798.  The  Vatican  was  plundered, 
and  occupied  by  troops.  The  unhappy  Pope,  Pius  VI., 
though  weighed  down  with  age  and  disease,  was  taken 
away  from  Rome,  transferred  to  Tuscany,  and  afterward 
to  France,  where  he  died  at  Valence.  His  death  was 
humiliating  for  his  person,  but  glorious  and  useful  for  his 
cause  ;  for  his  presence  and  sufferings  excited  the  most 
lively  enthusiasm  and  sympathy  even  in  the  land  of 
his  exile.  The  members  of  the  Directory  had  occasion 
to  learn  that  nothing  is  more  dangerous  than  to  make 
martyrs,  for  it  was  precisely  these  assaults  on  religion 
which  did  the  most  to  dishonor  and  ruin  them  They 
fell  into  infamy  and  impotence.  Their  policy  had  been 
so  odious  that  some  honest  persons  even  thought  the 
usurpation  of  Bonaparte  to  be  a  riddance.  Nothing 
condemns  them  so  severely  as  the  satisfaction  with 
which  the  country  saw  them  displaced  by  a  military 
dictatorship.  It  was  necessary  that  they  should  have 
thoroughly  disgusted  France,  before  she  could  have  con- 
descended to  applaud  so  sad  a  termination  of  the  grand 
liberal  movement  of  1789. 


292        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE  ALTARS  RESTORED  BY  LIBERTY. 

Entire  religious  liberty  did  not  exist  a  single  day  dur- 
ing the  whole  course  of  the  Revolution.  Even  under 
the  regime  of  the  separation  of  Church  and  State  it  was 
seriously  trammeled  by  the  general  government.  And 
in  many  cases  the  legal  impediments  were  rendered  ten- 
fold more  severe  by  the  passions  and  injustice  of  the 
provincial  magistrates.  These  acted  almost  every-where 
in  the  interest  of  the  anti-religious  tendency.  Notwith- 
standing these  obstacles,  as  soon  as  religion  became 
free  from  the  civil  administration,  and  was  left  to  itself, 
it  recovered  itself  with  astonishing  rapidity  from  the 
discredit  into  which  it  had  fallen.  France  witnessed  at 
the  close  of  the  eighteenth  century  the  unexpected  spec- 
tacle of  a  powerful  revival  of  Christian  faith.  Nothing 
is  more  false  than  to  attribute  the  restoration  of  Chris- 
tianity in  France  to  the  happy  policy  of  Bonaparte. 
No,  when  once  freed  from  the  State,  it  restored  itself 
spontaneously  on  a  soil  yet  trembling  and  covered  with 
ruins.  The  First  Consul,  in  his  efforts  to  regulate  and 
take  into  his  service  the  influence  of  the  Church,  only 
succeeded  in  arresting  one  of  the  finest  religious  move- 
ments which  our  country  ever  witnessed. 

Assuredly  it  was  a  very  difficult  task  to  re-establish 
religion  without  other  aid  than  that  of  free  convictions, 


Religion  and  tlie  Reign  of  Terror.  293 

in  a  country  where  Sensualism  seemed  to  be  the  goal  of 
philosophy,  and  where  a  scoffing  impiety  had  reigned  in 
the  refined  circles,  and,  like  an  overflowing  torrent, 
swept  among  the  lower  classes.  The  task  was  not  merely 
to  combat  the  vicious  doctrines  then  in  vogue,  but  to 
conquer  the  base  passions  which  sprang  from  them.  At 
the  close  of  the  Reign  of  Terror  the  moral  condition  of 
France  was  truly  deplorable.  The  nation  had  begun 
by  making  of  liberty  a  religion.  Disgusted  finally 
with  the  crimes  committed  in  its  name,  and  possessing 
no  longer  that  faith  which  gives  consolation  in  disap- 
pointment, and  saves  the  soul  from  universal  and  mor- 
bid doubt,  the  people  seem  to  have  lost  the  faculty  of 
believing  in  God.  Thus  the  greatest  bond  of  moral  re- 
straint was  broken. 

This  skepticism,  however,  could  not  still  the  tumult- 
uous vital  force  of  the  nation.  From  the  moment  that 
the  restraint  of  terror  ceased,  Paris  became  inspired  with 
a  sort  of  frenzy  for  pleasure.  She  cast  aside  the  red 
cap  of  terror,  but  bore  into  her  festivals  the  enthusiasm 
which  had  rendered  it  so  cruel.  It  was  another  illustra- 
tion of  how  closely  licentiousness  and  sanguinary  vio- 
lence are  allied.  The  writers  of  the  time  agree  in  de- 
picting Parisian  society  as  possessed  of  a  sort  of  feverish 
impatience  for  the  ignoble  pleasures  of  life,  and  as  aban- 
doning itself  without  shame  to  their  pursuit.  Never 
did  debauchery  parade  itself  with  more  audacity  in 
open  day.  In  its  Palais  Royal  Paris  possessed  a  veri- 
table bazar  of  vice.  Gambling  and  prostitution  collected 
there  a  luxurious  youth,  who  had  all  the  corruption  of 
the  ancient  regime  without  the  redeeming  trait  of  that 


294        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

elegance  which  imposes  a  sort  of  outward  restraint. 
What  was  graver  still,  the  institution  of  the  family  was 
seriously  undermined,  thanks  to  the  unheard  of  facility 
of  divorce,  and  the  almost  equal  footing  of  natural  and 
legitimate  children.  There  was  one  divorce  to  eleven 
marriages,  and  the  bonds  which  were  so  easily  dissolved 
were  little  respected  while  they  did  exist.  A  journal  of 
the  time  gave  the  true  explanation  of  this  deplorable 
situation.  "  We  are  the  only  people  in  the  world,"  said 
the  Eclair,  "  who  ever  attempted  to  do  without  religion. 
But  what  is  already  our  sad  experience  ?  Every  tenth 
day  [this  Sabbath  of  the  infidels]  we  are  astounded  by 
the  recital  of  more  crimes  and  assassinations  than  were 
committed  formerly  in  a  whole  year.  At  the  risk  of 
speaking  an  obsolete  language,  and  of  receiving  insult 
for  response,  we  declare  that  we  must  cease  striving 
to  destroy  the  remnants  of  religion  if  we  desire  to  pre- 
vent the  entire  dissolution  of  society."  The  restorers  of 
religion  found  a  great  obstacle  in  the  wide-spread  preju- 
dice, that  Christianity  is  inconsistent  with  free  institu- 
tions. Unfortunately  the  intrigues  of  the  emigrated 
royalist  clergy  gave  ample  ground  for  the  prejudice, 
and  the  revolutionists  unjustly  involved  all  the  clergy 
in  the  same  condemnation.  But  a  main  cause  of  the 
bitter  and  continued  persecution  was,  the  deep  convic- 
tion on  the  part  of  the  violent  party  that  the  only  way 
to  justify  or  efface  the  memory  of  its  past  cruelties  was, 
to  crush  and  destroy  every  trace  of  the  object  of  its 
oppression.  But  in  spite  of  all  these  obstacles  Chris- 
tianity was  destined  to  win  signal  victories  as  soon  as  it 
obtained  even  partial  justice  and  limited  liberty. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  295 

As  the  reader  will  remember,  the  Catholic  Church 
was  yet  divided  into  two  hostile  sections.  Even  after 
the  abrogation  of  the  too  famous  Civil  Constitution  of 
the  Clergy,  which  had  caused  the  schism,  the  strife  be- 
tween the  jurors  and  the  non-jurors  had  continued  with 
equal  ardor.  The  former  had  retained  their  semi-Pres- 
byterian organization,  the  latter  Jiad  redoubled  their 
attachment  to  the  Pope.  This  animosity  shall  not  pre- 
vent us  from  doing  justice  to  the  glorious  part  which 
both  clerical  parties  took  in  the  revival  of  faith  in 
France.  In  the  ardor  of  their  differences  they  were 
unable  to  appreciate  and  esteem  each  other ;  but  it  is 
the  prerogative  of  history  to  overlook  these  sad  misun- 
derstandings, which  separated  and  alienated  noble  hearts. 
The  jurors  were  wrong  in  regarding  their  refractory 
brethren  as  wholly  illiberal  and  royalist,  and  in  over- 
looking their  pious  courage ;  while  the  non-jurors  were 
unjust  in  refusing  to  recognize  the  pure  and  sincere  zeal 
with  which  their  opponents  labored  for  the  restoration 
of  worship  in  France.  It  would  seem  that  the  common 
persecution  they  suffered  during  the  Reign  of  Terror 
should  have  reconciled  them ;  but  this  was  not  the 
case ;  their  dissensions  continued  even  on  the  galleys 
and  in  the  prisons.  It  is  our  duty  now  to  bring  them 
together,  and  extend  to  both  parties  an  equal  respect 
for  their  heroic  devotion  to  the  service  of  religion. 
Others  may  ransack  the  tombs  and  revive  posthumous 
calumnies ;  for  our  pai*,  at  this  distance  of  time,  we  have 
only  applause  for  their  equally  generous,  equally  diverse, 
efforts  to  restore  to  France  that  God  whom  she  for  a 
time  had  seemed  to  abandon,  but  whom  she  found  her- 


296        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

self  unable  to  dispense  with.  In  fact,  no  great  nation  can 
definitively  abjure  religious  ideas;  the  madness  which, 
for  a  moment,  may  lead  thereto,  is  but  the  crisis  of  a 
fever  which  would  bring  death  if  it  lingered  any  length 
of  time.  Moreover,  the  effort  itself  to  destroy  religion 
only  increases  its  strength.  Like  the  phenix,  it  rises  in 
renewed  youth  out  of  its  own  ashes. 

A  philosophy  hostile  to  Christianity  attempted  to 
turn  to  its  own  profit  the  revival  of  religious  sentiments, 
but  gained  for  its  pains  only  the  shame  of  failure.  It 
attempted  to  establish  a  worship  which  should  rival  the 
ancient  religion,  but  succeeded  only  in  giving  a  pitiable 
comedy,  which  promptly  vanished  in  the  presence  of 
empty  benches  and  its  own  inanity.  The  complete 
check  of  Theophilanthropy  demonstrates,  practically 
and  conclusively,  the  powerlessness  of  a  belief  without 
mysteries  and  dogmas,  to  found  a  religion.  The  worst 
mythologies  of  Asia  have  succeeded  in  uniting  whole 
nations,  for  the  reason  that,  notwithstanding  their  impure 
and  bloody  legends,  they  assumed  to  speak  in  the  name 
of  Divinity,  and  enjoyed  in  times  of  ignorance  the  pres- 
tige of  revelations  from  Heaven.  They  satisfied,  though 
in  a  very  perverted  manner,  the  natural  and  indestructi- 
ble thirst  of  the  human  heart  for  direct  supernatural 
communication  with  God.  Hence  their  success.  But  a 
religion  which  is  only  a  cold,  theoretical  system,  a  pure 
creature  of  the  reason,  is  fit  only  to  remain  in  that 
chilly  sphere.  Every  attempt  to  warm  it  into  life  mis- 
erably fails.  While  the  ardent  apologists  of  the  tenth- 
day  festivals  began  anew  underhandedly  the  shameful 
work  of  Hebert  and  Chaumette,  the  Theophilanthropists 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  297 

attempted  in  a  timid  manner  to  resuscitate  the  worship 
of  the  Supreme  Being,  which  had  been  interrupted  by 
the  fall  of  Robespierre  ;  the  former  were  the  offspring  of 
Diderot  and  Helvetius,  the  latter,  of  Rousseau  and  Ro- 
bespierre. It  is  well  known  how  numerous  were  the 
Deists  at  this  time  in  France,  England,  and  Germany. 
But  it  is  only  amid  the  confusion  arid  fever  of  a  revolu- 
tion, when  all  creeds  seem  to  be  overthrown,  that  such 
an  attempt  would  be  made  as  that  of  substituting  for 
Christianity  the  religion  of  the  Contrat  Social. 

An  attempt  to  prepare  the  public  mind  for  the  new 
religion  was  made  by  a  free  use  of  the  press.  The  ad- 
vantages of  a  worship  wholly  free  from  superstition,  and 
consisting  simply  in  the  adoration  of  God  and  the  prac- 
tice of  virtue,  were  abundantly  set  forth.  It  was  at  the. 
close  of  the  year  1796  that  the  passage  from  theory  to 
practice  took  place.  *  Among  the  five  heads  of  families 
who  united  to  establish  the  new  religion  was  Haiiy,  a 
brother  of  the  famous  chemist,  director  of  the  asylum 
for  the  blind.  A  former  chapel  which  was  connected 
with  the  institution,  served  for  the  celebration  of  the 
firs*  public  worship.  Soon  they  obtained  permission 
from  the  government,  which  was  very  partial  to  the 
sect,  to  share  with  the  Catholic  priests  the  use  of  the 
churches,  founding  their  claim  on  the  ground  that  as 
the  Constitution  was  not  more  favorable  to  one  religion 
than  to  another,  the  churches,  being  public  edifices, 
should  belong  equally  to  all  opinions.  The  Thcophi- 
lanthropists  obtained  thus  the  enjoyment  of  twelve 
churches,  among  which  was  the  cathedral  The  diffi- 
cult task  was,  not  to  obtain,  but  to  fill  them.  They, 

38 


298        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

therefore,  strove  to  give  to  their  worship  all  the  attrac- 
tion of  which  it  was  capable.  They  engraved  on  the 
walls  of  the  temples  choice  maxims  of  natural  morality 
from  all  schools  of  philosophy  and  from  all  religions. 
An  altar  was  erected  in  the  center  of  the  edifice,  and 
upon  it  were  placed,  sometimes  flowers,  and  sometimes 
fruit,  according  to  the  season.  But  these  pastoral  rites 
were  intermingled  with  grander  solemnities.  Infants 
were  dedicated  to  the  Supreme  Being.  At  marriage 
the  affianced  were  bound  together  by  garlands  of  flow- 
ers, whose  extremities  were  held  by  their  relatives  and 
friends.  At  Bourges  it  was  contrived  that  during  the 
nuptial  ceremony  two  doves  should  be  made  to  appear 
at  the  altar,  a  touching  symbol  of  conjugal  affection. 
At  the  obsequies  of  a  Theophilanthropist,  a  flower  was 
suspended  from  the  funeral  urn.  But  the  essential  part 
of  the  new  worship  was  the  reading  and  the  discourse. 
The  preacher  was  required  to  be  married  or  a  widower ; 
but  in  addition  to  this  guarantee  of  maturity,  his  dis- 
courses were  subjected  before  delivery  to  the  censorship 
of  a  committee.  The  new  order  of  priests  delivered 
their  messages  extempore  or  by  reading.  These  con- 
sisted of  homilies  on  tolerance,  filial  piety,  probity  in 
commerce,  and  similar  subjects.  Touching  funeral  eulo- 
gies of  eminent  citizens  were  a  part  of  the  programme. 
That  the  priests  might  have  a  pleasing  aspect  they  were 
clothed  in  a  white  robe  with  a  violet  girdle.  This  flat- 
tering appearance  not  sufficing  to  redeem  the  monotony 
of  their  discourses,  they  were  intermingled  with  hymns 
to  the  seasons  and  virtues.  Fine  opera  singers  were 
hired,  whose  voices  might  attract  the  multitude.  When 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  299 

the  money  failed,  the  members  of  the  sect  undertook 
the  singing  themselves,  but  their  devotion  was  poorly- 
rewarded,  for  they  discovered  by  the  empty  seats  that 
the  audiences  had  come  to  hear  the  fine  voices,  and  not 
for  the  edifying  homilies.  Theophilanthropy  lived  only 
from  the  patronage  of  the  government.  La  Reveilliere 
Lepaux,  the  Director,  was  its  most  useful  adherent,  and 
gained  for  it  a  certain  number  and  prestige ;  for  apos- 
tles who  are  in  power  are  always  sure  to  succeed  in 
gaining  proselytes.  If  the  Directory  insisted  with  so 
much  earnestness  on  the  outward  observance  of  the 
tenth  days,  it  was  in  part  to  shackle  the  liberty  of 
Catholicism  to  the  profit  of  the  new  religion.  The 
latter,  however,  after  having  transferred  its  worship  to 
the  tenth  days  found  itself  compelled  to  return  to  the 
Sabbath,  s*o  strong  was  the  force  of  habit  among  the 
people.  The  agents  of  the  government  aided  the  sect 
with  all  their  influence.  The  Minister  of  the  Interior 
pushed  his  zeal  so  far,  as  to  distribute  throughout  the 
country  at  government  expense  the  Manual  of  the 
TheophUanthropUts.  Pecuniary  aid  was  also  given  to 
pay  the  orators,  and  to  indemnify  the  public  for  the 
ennui  of  listening  to  them.  Societies  were  established 
in  and  about  Paris,  at  Bourges  and  Poitiers.  In  Yonne 
they  furnished  an  intolerant  administration,  a  pretext 
for  persecuting  the  Catholics.  But  neither  the  favors  of 
power  nor  the  prestige  which  noted  personages,  such  as 
Groupil  de  Prefeln,  Julien  of  Toulouse,  and  Bernardin 
de  St.  Pierre,  brought  to  the  sect,  sufficed  to  prevent 
this  ridiculous  religion  from  falling  into  neglect  and 
abandonment.    The  order  of  the  Consuls,  of  October, 


300        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror, 

1802,  which  closed  the  temples  to  the  Theophilanthro- 
pists,  did  them  the  signal  service  of  saving  their  worship 
from  dying  of  mere  inanition.  It  was  fitting  that  a  wor- 
ship which  had  lived  only  by  the  smiles  of  power  should 
-  fall  by  its  disfavor.  It  had  quieted  and  satisfied  neither 
the  ancient  convictions  nor  the  new  passions.  Its  pas- 
toral sentimentalism  was  incapable  of  awakening  the 
religious  curiosity  of  France,  even  when  one  of  her  chiel 
magistrates  had  accepted  the  pastoral  staff  of  the  white- 
robed  and  violet-girded  priests,  which,  however,  was, 
after  all,  a  singular  way  of  appealing  for  favor  to  the 
land  of  Voltaire  and  Beaumarchais.  It  was  the  ancient 
religion,  which  the  demagogues  had  vainly  believed 
they  had  destroyed,  that  arose  and  defeated  these 
efforts  of  its  enemies.  In  losing  its  civil  power  and 
wealth,  and  in  suffering,  instead  of  inflicting,  persecu- 
tion, it  arose  and  purified  itself,  and  no  longer  gave  just 
occasion  for  those  terrible  charges  of  guilt  which  in  its 
prosperous  days  had  so  fatally  shaken  it. 

We  have  seen  that  the  revival  of  religion  at  the  close 
of  the  last  century  was  promoted  the  efforts  of  the 
refractory  as  well  as  of  the  juring  clergy.  How  great 
had  continued  to  be  the  influence  of  the  former  not  only 
in  the  South  and  West,  where  they  were  in  the  major- 
ity, but  also  in  the  great  cities,  and  particularly  in 
Paris,  is  perfectly  evident  from  the  multiplicity  and 
barbarity  of  the  measures  that  had  been  taken  against 
them  They  ceased  not,  however,  to  celebrate  the 
sacred  rites,  often  in  a  barn  or  a  garret.  Nothing  was 
better  fitted  to  animate  their  zeal  than  these  dangers 
and  difficulties.     A  thousand  ingenious  methods  had 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  301 


been  contrived  for  conveying  to  the  victims  of  the 
Terrorists  the  last  consolations  of  religion.  How  often 
lias  a  secret,  furtively-exchanged  sign  from  a  disguised 
priest  suddenly  appearing  at  a  window  or  along  the 
passage  of  the  death-car,  conveyed  to  the  victims  the 
blessings  of  the  Church  !  It  would  be  false  to  attribute 
to  political  passions  this  attachment  of  the  people  for 
the  refractory  clergy.  It  is  certain  that  it  was  shared 
by  sincere  adherents  of  the  Revolution.  The  letters  of 
Charlotte  Corday,  recently  published  by  Casimir  Per- 
rier,  reveal  in  this  republican  heroine  a  lively  repug- 
nance to  the  Constitutional  Clergy.  The  political  or- 
ganization received  by  the  latter  from  the  revolutionists 
might  well  have  excited  grave  religious  scruples.  It  is, 
therefore,  not  astonishing  that  notwithstanding  their 
unfortunate  connivance  at  the  counter-revolution,  the 
refractory  clergy  retained  an  immense  influence  in  the 
nation.  This  fact  became  visible  as  soon  as  any  meas- 
ure of  liberty  of  conscience  was  guaranteed.  Though 
still  much  trammeled,  they  re-established  the  ancient 
worship  wherever  it  was  at  all  practicable,  and  espe- 
cially in  the  large  cities.  They  acted  strictly  independ- 
ently of  the  Constitutional  Clergy,  kept  up  against 
them  a  vigorous  controversy,  and  obtained  from  their 
ranks  many  recantations.  "  The  extraordinary  earnest- 
ness," read  we  in  a  journal  of  the  day,  published  by  this 
party,  "  manifested  by  the  faithful  to  profit  by  our  re- 
covered liberty — the  holy  joy  they  manifested,  lightly 
esteeming  the  lack  of  exterior  pomp  in  our  worship,  and 
regarding  the  inward  glory  as  its  chief  ornament, — 
every  thing  proves  how  vital  was  the  power  of  religion 


302        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

in  the  hearts.  The  churches  reopened,  are  very  simple 
in  their  decoration ;  their  brightest  luster  comes  from 
the  piety  of  those  who  fill  them."  At  Paris  -the  re- 
establishment  of  the  non-jurors'  worship  encountered 
scarcely  any  obstacle.  At  Easter,  1*796,  the  attendance 
on  their  churches  was  considerable,  and  at  the  same 
time  next  year  still  larger.  About  thirty  churches  and 
several  oratories  were  given  over  to  this  recently  perse- 
cuted worship.  The  Church  of  St.  Roch  was  recovered 
in  May,  1797.  "Men,  women,  children,  poor  and  rich, 
turned  workmen,  and  the  church  quickly  a^-ose  from  its 
ruins."  The  Bishop  of  St.  Papoul  consecrated  seventy 
priests.  Thus  the  refractory  Church  restored  itself 
spontaneously  in  open  republic  without  the  aid  of  Bona- 
parte. In  the  provinces  it  obtained  equally  great  suc- 
cesses, though  it  met  also  serious  opposition.  At  Ver- 
sailles and  Marseilles  riots  occurred,  and  many  priests 
were  thrown  into  prison.  At  Limoges  the  incarcerated 
priests  were  confined  in  solitude,  and  subjected  to  every 
sort  of  ill-treatment.  Women  were  imprisoned  for  hav- 
ing heard  mass.  The  tribunal  of  Versailles  concluded 
to  liberate  the  arrested  priests,  so  fully  were  they  found 
to  enjoy  the  esteem  of  the  population.  Their  prison 
had  become  a  temple,  so  many  were  the  people  that 
flocked  to  it.  In  one  place  a  priest  was  snatched  from 
the  altar  at  which  he  was  officiating,  but  the  populac^ 
rescued  him.  At  Bolbec  military  measures  were  taken 
to  prevent  the  midnight  mass,  but  the  body  of  troops 
sent  to  stop  the  service  were  so  affected  by  it  as  to 
change  their  purpose,  and  take  part  in  it  with  great 
reverence.    Violence  could  not  check  the  current  of 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  303 

public  opinion,  which  pronounced  itself  continually  with 
greater  emphasis  in  favor  of  liberty  of  conscience.  To 
this  current  the  discourses  of  Camille  Jordan,  Royer 
Collard,  and  Portalis  *  greatly  added.    But  the  Direc- 
tory and  the  Jacobins  strove  all  the  more  to  check  it. 
The  following  order,  in  regard  to  the  refractory  priests, 
was  sent  tojthe  national  Commissioners  in  June,  1796  : 
"Wear  out  their  patience,  envelop  them  in  your  sur- 
veillance, disquiet  them  by  day,  and  trouBle  them  by 
night."    Nevertheless  had  it  not  been  for  the  Direc- 
tory's coup  d'etat  of  September,  1797,  the  ancient 
Church  would  have  been  reorganized  along-side  of  the 
Constitutional  Churches,  throughout  the  land.  This 
turned  back  for  awhile  the  happy  religious  movement. 
Barbarous  decrees  were   launched   forth,  and  many 
priests  banished ;  but  still  the  persecuted  worship  was 
held  in  secret,  and  counted  its  adherents  by  multitudes. 
If,  instead  of  having  been  reorganized  by  Bonaparte 
after  the  coup  d'etat  of  Brumaire,  (November,  1799,)  the 
nation  had  been  permitted  to  enjoy  true  liberty,  there 
would  have  sprung  up  from  her  persecution  and  suffer- 
ings a  self-regenerated  and  glorious  Church.    She  had 
already  erected  her  altars  throughout  the  land  ;  it  was 
of  liberty  only,  and  not  of  forced  governmental  reorgan- 
ization, that  she  had  need.    The  escaped  priests,  who 
had  lived  of  the  charities  of  the  English  or  of  the  Pope, 
would  doubtless  have  returned  in  large  numbers,  and 
with  many  prejudices.    The  latter,  however,  would  have 
soon  died  away  under  the  benign  influence  of  toleration. 
Of  means  for  defraying  the  non-jurors'  worship,  there 
*  See  Appendix,  note  41. 


304        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

was  no  scarcity,  and  had  peace  and  any  degree  of  pros- 
perity returned,  there  would  have  resulted  under  the 
smiles  of  liberty  a  flourishing  and  well-disciplined 
Church. 

And  surely  the  enjoyment  of  liberty  could  not  have 
been  otherwise  than  favorable  to  the  new,  or  Constitu- 
tional Church — to  that  one  which,  while  holding  fast  to 
Catholic  orthodoxy,  had  cheerfully  sided  with  the  cause 
of  freedom. '  True,  she  had  many  wounds  to  heal,  for  in 
the  days  of  trial  she  had  suffered  from  apostasies. 
While  enjoying  the  smiles  of  government  patronage  she 
had  been  disgraced  by  numerous  bad  priests,  but  the 
salutary  ordeal  of  persecution  had  freed  her  from  the 
hypocrites.  Soon  after  the  fall  of  Robespierre,  when  a 
measure  of  liberty  was  allowed,  she  engaged  earnestly 
in  the  work  of  repairing  her  losses.  The  man  who  was 
especially  active  in  this  holy  work  was  Gregory,  the 
Deputy  to  the  Constituent  Assembly  and  to  the  Con- 
vention, and  Bishop  of  Blois.  He  has  been  calumniated 
and  outraged ;  the  most  vile  malice  pursued  him  even 
to  his  death-bed.  We  admit  that  he  sometimes  pushed 
his  love  of  free  institutions  to  an  excess  unbecoming  a 
priest,  or  even  a  true  liberal ;  but,  to  be  just,  we  must 
make  allowance  for  the  circumstances.  His  clerical 
opponents  were  not  less  extreme.  One  may  charge 
Gregory  with  unfortunate  words,  but  never  with  a  base 
or  unjust  action.  He  was  pure  of  the  blood  of  the 
King,  though  he  carried  too  far  his  indulgence  for  his 
unjust  judges.  He  never  lost  an  opportunity  of  advo- 
cating liberty  of  conscience  for  his  bitterest  advjrsaries. 
He  was  always  a  champion  of  right  and  justice  whether 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  305 

it  was  in  pleading  the  cause  of  the  slaves,  of  the  Jews, 
or  of  his  dissenting  brethren  of  the  clergy.  His  noble 
attitude  on  the  day  of  the  abjuration  in  the  darkest 
hours  of  terror,  would  alone  suffice  to  conciliate  for  him 
universal  respect.  His  indefatigable  zeal  to  reorganize 
the  Constitutional  Church  merits  equal  admiration. 
Aided  by  several  colleagues,  and  especially  by  Lecoz,  a 
wise,  moderate,  and  eloquent  man,  Gregory  accom- 
plished in  a  short  time  a  truly  important  work.  He 
combined  firmness  with  wisdom ;  and  no  one  has  ever 
done  more  in  France  to  reconcile  religion  and  liberty. 

The  writings  of  Gregory  contain  a  vivid  description 
of  the  deplorable  state  into  which  religion  had  fallen 
during  the  Reign  of  Terror.  The  sufferings  endured, 
were  trifling  in  comparison  with  the  disgrace  of  the 
apostasies.  Most  of  the  Churches  had  lost  their  Bishop, 
either  by  death  or  exile.  The  people  had  almost  lost 
the  habit  of  worship.  But  scarcely  had  any  degree  of 
liberty  been  allowed,  when  Gregory  convoked  at  Paris, 
May  15th,  1795,  a  number  of  Bishops.  These  men 
in  union  published  two  encyclical  letters,  designed  to 
obviate  various  disorders,  set  aside  the  unworthy  priests, 
and  provisionally  organize  the  Church.  In  one  of  the 
letters  these  pious  Bishops  say,  "  Let  those  to  whom 
God  has  given  grace  to  remain  faithful  in  the  midst  of 
the  terrors  of  death,  rejoice  to  have  been  worthy  to  suf- 
fer something  for  Jesus  Christ.  We  Bishops  especially, 
pastors  of  souls,  are  responsible  to  God,  to  the  Church, 
and  to  posterity  for  our  efforts  to  revive  the  faith." 
Elsewhere  in  this  document,  which  is  worthy  of  the 

lirst  ages  of  the  Chinch,  we  read,  "Let  the  Pastors 

89 


306        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

show  their  zeal  to  proclaim  Jesus  Christ ;  let  them  ex- 
hort the  faithful  to  a  careful  study  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment ;  let  them  by  their  conduct  render  their  ministry 
respected."  The  Bishops  caused  to  be  translated  the 
fine  treatise  of  St.  Cyprian,  De  J^apsis,  which  seemed  to 
have  been  written  for  the  exigencies  of  that  very  time. 
Multitudes  of  answers  were  sent  to  the  circulars,  and 
the  faithful  Bishops  and  priests  joined  hands  in  the 
work  of  raising  up  the  Church.  A  journal  for  mutual 
communication  was  established,  aiid  Gregory  conceived 
the  happy  thought  of  establishing  a  society  of  Christian 
philosophy  for  the  purpose  of  circulating  works  in  de- 
fense of  religion.  In  most  of  the  cities  the  people 
flocked  to  the  services  with  unprecedented  ardor.  The 
temples  did  not  suffice  to  contain  them.  There  seemed 
to  be  a  desire  to  prolong  indefinitely  the  acts  of  devotion, 
and  tears  filled  the  eyes  of  all.  At  Sens  all  labors 
ceased,  and  the  Church  of  St.  Peter  was  crowded  with 
prostrate  penitents  bewailing  their  past  unfaithfulness. 
One  could  have  witnessed  scenes  as  full  of  pathos  as 
those  which  took  place  at  Jerusalem  when  the  Jews,  on 
returning  from  exile,  were  able  again  to  worship  the 
God  of  their  fathers  in  their  own  land.  The  Bishops, 
by  their  circulars,  favored  and  directed  the  good  move- 
ment. "Having  no  longer  any  political  connections," 
so  wrote  Gregory  to  his  colleagues,  "you  will  not  be 
tempted  to  stay  yourself  on  the  arm  of  flesh.  God 
alone  will  be  your  strength.  The  splendor  of  the  pre- 
cious metals  will  no  longer  dazzle  in  our  temples. 
Credulous  simplicity  will  no  longer  confound  with  true 
piety  that  which  too  often  was  only  its  poison.  Let 


RdigidH  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  307 


religion  revive  among  ns ;  let  it  revive  pure  as  it  camg 
from  the  hands  of  Christ.  We  are  placed  as  it  were 
■gain  at  the  origin  of  the  Church."  "  We  declare," 
wrote  Bishop  Lecoz,  "that  being  subjects  of  a  kingdom 
not  of  this  world,  we  will  not  dispute  for  temporal  inter- 
ests. Christianity  does  not  meddle  with  governments; 
it  conflict-  with  none,  and  lives  peaceably  under  all." 
This  was  the  spirit  that  animated  the  Constitutional 
Church  as  revived  by  Gregory  and  his  colleagues.  Un 
connected  with  the  State,  it  was  yet  warmly  patriotic, 
and  spontaneously  celebrated  the  victories  of  the  repub- 
lic. In  honor  of  the  peace  established  after  the  battle 
of  Marengo  more  than  thirty  thousand  persons  attended 
the  Te  Deum  which  was  sungr  at  Xotre  Dame.  This 
Church  made  no  concessions  to  the  prejudices  of  the 
day,  and  was  marked  by  great  moral  strictness.  Its 
linn  attachment  to  the  great  doctrines  of  Christianity  is 
unquestionable. 

It  is  true,  it  was  very  free  from  an  Ultramontane 
spirit,  and  it  would  have  seen  without  displeasure  the 
final  overthrow  of  the  temporal  power  of  the  Papacy,  as 
appears  from  the  following  extract  from  the  official 
journal  in  1793  :  -'The  destiny  of  religion  has  for  a  long 
while  been  involved  in  all  the  passions  which  reign  in 
courts.  Christianity  is  henceforth  to  shine  in  its  own 
glory,  and  since  the  Popes  are  happily  to  be  nothing 
more  than  spiritual  Bishops,  the  ministers  of  religion 
will  be  more  sure  than  ever  of  attaching  to  them  irrevo- 
cably the  hearts  of  the  nations."  The  new  Church, 
though  extremely  Gallican  in  principles,  never  for  a 
moment  broke  its  communion  with  the  chief  of  Catholi- 


308        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

cism,  nor  ceased  to  pray  the  Holy  Father  to  render  peace 
to  the  Church  by  avoiding  radical  measures.  Not  that 
it  had  not  felt  a  true  spirit  of  reform,  for  it  aspired  to 
develop  in  its  bosom  a  genuine  piety  which  should  lay 
less  stress  on  forms  than  on  substance,  on  symbols  than 
on  reality.  Gregory  strove  to  put  a  stop  to  supersti- 
tious pilgrimages,  saying  that  it  was  "  less  praiseworthy 
to  have  visited  Jerusalem  than  to  have  well  lived  at 
Jerusalem."  He  strove  likewise  to  check  the  venera- 
tion of  relics.  It  was  very  natural  that  at  this  time  an 
effort  should  be  made  to  render  more  strict  and  solemn 
the  admission  of  the  young  to  the  first  communion.  It 
was  decided  to  surround  this  rite  with  better  guaran- 
tees, and  to  prepare  for  it  by  solid  instruction.  Gregory 
desired  that  the  heads  of  families  should  daily  use  pray- 
ers in  French,  in  their  homes.  He  labored  to  multiply 
the  means  of  instruction,  founding  many  popular  libra- 
ries. Thus  was  manifested  an  earnest  protest  against 
formalism,  that  plague  of  modern  Christianity.  The 
Bishops  were  indefatigable  in  their  labors.  Gregory 
had  preached  within  a  short  space  of  time  fifty  episcopal 
sermons,  and  given  confirmation  to  forty-five  thousand 
persons,  in  the  bounds  of  his  own  diocese.  These  were 
truly  apostolical  labors,  and  they  were  abundantly  re- 
warded. We  have  the  best  of  evidence  for  the  fact, 
that  within  three  years  worship  had  been  re-established 
in  forty  thousand  communities  in  France.  True,  the 
ancient  splendor  was  lacking.  Many  of  the  ministers 
lived  in  the  greatest  poverty.  More  than  one  endured 
privations  similar  to  those  of  that  aged  priest  who  was 
found  one  day  in  his  garret  mending  his  black  hose  witli 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  309 

white  thread.  In  an  official  letter  to  the  people  the 
Bishop  of  Blois  said,  "The  disasters  and  evils  which 
weigh  down  your  Pastors  force  us  to  say  to  you,  as  St. 
Paul  to  the  Galatians,  'Let  him  who  is  taught  £ive  to 
him  who  teacches.'  But  whatever  may  be  the  fruits  of 
your  thankfulness  to  those  venerable  Pastors  who  have 
lost  and  suffered  all  things  for  Jesus  Christ,  they,  as  we, 
will  continue  to  hold  to  you  the  language  of  the  Apostle 
to  the  Thessalonians,  '  Such  is  our  love  for  you  that  we 
desire  not  only  to  preach  to  you  the  Gospel,  but  also  to 
give  our  lives  for  you,  for  you  are  very  dear  to  us."' 
This  branch  of  the  Church  had  expressly  prohibited 
itself  from  receiving  money  for  special  services,  prayers, 
blessings,  and  the  mass,  and  confided  entirely  in  the 
enlightened  liberality  of  the  faithful.  And  its  confi- 
dence was  rewarded,  for  though  the  Church  suffered 
much  at  first,  yet  in  the  end  the  voluntary  gifts  proved 
sufficient.  This  ministry  of  labor  and  poverty  rejoiced 
the  souls  of  those  who  shared  it.  One  priest,  almost 
seventy  years  old,  declared  that  in  this  work  of  toil  and 
sacrifice  he  had  as  it  were  renewed  his  youth.  To  these 
trials  of  poverty  are  to  be  added  the  severer  ones  re- 
sulting from  the  intolerance  of  the  petty  local  magis- 
trates. Early  in  the  Revolution  one  of  the  departments 
made  the  following  decree  :  "  Whereas  there  is  nothing 
more  impolitic  and  antisocial  than  the  tolerance  of  any 
worship  whatever,  be  it  therefore  decreed  that  all  pri- 
vate and  public  signs  of  worship  shall  disappear." 
After  the  fall  of  Robespierre  such  an  open  outrage  was 
no  longer  possible,  though  in  many  places  the  spirit  of 
intolerance  remained  the  same.    In  many  provinces  the 


310        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

law  of  the  tenth-day  festivals  was  the  occasion  of  great 
suffering  to  the  Catholics.  In  Eure  the  Commissioner 
of  the  Directory  expressed  the  will  of  the  government 
thus:  "All  ministers  are  invited  to  transfer  their  festi- 
vals and  religious  services  to  the  tenth  days.  For  a 
republican  this  invitation  is  an  order ;  to  act  otherwise 
would  be  an  ill-timed  return  toward  Ultramontanism, 
and  a  check  to  the  progress  of  reason.  Instead  of  kill- 
ing fanaticism,  you  would  give  it  new  life.  -  You  would 
dig  for  the  nation  a  gulf  into  which  you  yourselves 
would  fall."  This  was  the  basest  violation  of  con- 
science, and  could  not,  therefore,  reach  its  object.  A 
priest  in  Yonne  made  the  following  noble  response  :  "  I 
cannot  obey  the  invitation  to  transfer  the  Sabbath  to 
the  tenth  days.  As  minister  of  the  Catholic  religion,  I 
demand  for  it  the  free  exercise  which  is  guaranteed  by 
the  Constitution.  As  citizen,  I  demand  of  the  magis- 
trates of  the  people  to  be  maintained  in  the  enjoyment 
of  my  right."  The  obligation  to  share  the  churches  with 
the  Theophilanthropists  was  another  sore  trial.  It  is 
necessary  to  take  into  account  all  these,  and  many  other 
obstacles,  in  order  to  arrive  at  a  just  appreciation  of  the 
progress  which  religion  made  under  the  auspices  of  de- 
voted men  in  these  troublous  times.  How  much  greater 
would  have  been  the  result  had  the  Church  been  in  the 
enjoyment  of  unrestricted  liberty  ! 

It  is  sometimes  thought  that  the  independency  of  the 
Church  on  the  State  is  incompatible  with  order  in  its 
organization.  This  is  abundantly  refuted  by  the  two 
National  Councils  which  assembled  at  Paris  in  1797  and 
1801.    More  respectable  assemblies  were  never  held  in 


Religion  and-  the  Reign  of  Terror.  311 

Christendom.  They  were  not  made  up  of  opulent  prel- 
ates ;  it  was  at  the  price  of  the  severest  sacrifices  that 
most  of  the  members  had  made  the  journey.  They 
wore  men  who  had  borne  the  heat  of  the  day,  and  en- 
dured bitter  persecutions.  They  were  exposed  to  the 
hatred  of  the  adherents  of  the  ancient  regime  because  of 
their  liberal  patriotism,  and  to  the  outrages  of  the  fa- 
natics of  the  new,  because  of  their  unconquerable  attach- 
ment to  the  faith  of  their  fathers. 

Though  it  is  not  our  business  to  write  the  history  of 
these  two  Councils,  we  may,  however,  refer  to  the  re- 
sults. The  first  was  convoked  at  Paris  by  the  Bishops 
in  1797,  and  had  been  preceded  by  regular  elections  in 
the  provincial  synods.  It  was  opened  in  Notre  Dame 
in  August  by  a  sermon -by  Lecoz.  The  pious  Bishop 
expressed  his  joy  at  the  spectacle  of  the  recently  pro- 
scribed religion  rising,  like  Christ,  from  its  tomb. 
"  Who  of  you,"  said  he,  "  would  have  dared  to  indulge 
in  the  faintest  expectation  that  in  a  little  time  one 
would  see  united  in  this  holy  place  these  venerable 
Bishops,  these  pious  Pastors,  all  these  intrepid  priests 
who,  lately  the  victims  of  a  violent  tempest,  and  the 
objects  of  a  most  horrible  proscription,  were  wandering 
from  cavern  to  cavern,  or  pining  in  dark  and  sickly 
prisons,  and  weeping,  not  over  their  captivity,  not  over 
the  burden  of  their  chains,  but  over  the  desolating  ces- 
sation of  worship  ?  "  Then,  painting  the  joy  that  had 
been  manifested  throughout  the  country  on  the  revival 
of  worship,  he  closed  with  a  touching  exhortation  to 
harmonious  action,  addressed  to  the  refractory  clergy. 
Among  the  first  acts  of  the  Council  was  the  sending  of 


312        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

two  letters,  one  to  the  Pope,  and  the  other  to  the  non- 
juring  clergy,  urging  both  to  the  necessity  of  concilia- 
tory co-operation.  It  showed  itself  very  moderate  in  its 
measures,  and  generously  liberal  toward  all  its  oppo- 
nents. It  desired  to  introduce  prayers  in  the  vulgar 
tongue  in  the  reorganized  Church,  and  took  stringent 
measures  for  introducing  and  securing  strict  morals  both 
in  the  clergy  and  in  the  membership. 

The  second  Council  was  opened  on  the  29th  of  June, 
1801,  in  the  presence  of  a  vast  multitude.  The  session, 
however,  which  was  intended  to  complete  the  work  of 
Church  reorganization  in  France,  had  scarcely  begun, 
when  it  was  compelled  to  dissolve  itself  on  the  order  of 
the  First  Consul,  who  had  just  concluded  a  Concordat 
with  the  Pope.  This  was  an  act  of  simple  tyranny. 
The  time  had  come  when  Bonaparte  desired  to  prevent 
all  freedom  of  speech  both  in  Church  and  State.  We 
will  see,  in  a  subsequent  chapter,  by  what  acts  of  dic- 
tatorial domination  the  pacification  which  this  Coun- 
cil was  designed  to  complete,  was,  I  will  not  say,  real- 
ized, but  forcibly  imposed.  We  will  here  merely  state 
that  on  the  eve  of  this  Concordat  the  Constitutional 
Church  was  in  full  opening  prosperity,  and  that  it  owed, 
most  assuredly,  its  increasing  influence  to  its  independ- 
ency of  the  State.  The  venerable  President  of  the  first 
Council  spoke  as  follows,  in  his  call  for  the  second : 
"  Some  of  you  are  alarmed  that  the  Church  has  been 
despoiled  of  its  property.  For  this  let  us  rather  adore 
Divine  Providence.  For  a  lon^  time  the  wicked  have 
dared  to  assert  that  the  religion  of  Christ  was  supported 
only  by  the  vast  possessions  of  its  ministers.    For  a 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  313 

long  time,  also,  the  Church  herself  has  groaned  to  see 
entering  into  her  sanctuary  men  who  seemed  to  be  in- 
fluenced only  by  her  wealth.    The  Lord  has  desired  by 
a  single  stroke  to  stop  both  the  blasphemies  of  the  un- 
believing and  the  scandalous  cupidity  of  his  ministers. 
He  has  desired  to  perpetuate,  without  the  influence  or 
aid  of  wealth,  a  religion  which  was  founded  without  it. 
When  Christ  called  the  twelve,  to  what  was  it  that  he 
called  them  ?    Wealth  and  honors  ?    Xo ;  but  to  labor, 
pain,  and  self-denial ;  and  to  crosses,  for  their  recompense. 
If  then  we,  the  ministers  of  Christ,  are  reduced  to  this 
apostolical  condition,  should  we  murmur?    Ah,  let  us 
rather  rejoice,  and  bless  this  admirable  providence. 
The  Lord  has  re-established  the  evangelical  poverty  of 
his  ministers."    Who  will  not  recognize  in  this  noble 
language,  an  echo  of  the  primitive  times,  when  the  moral 
power  of  the  Church  was  measured  by  her  political  and 
pecuniary  insignificance  ? 

The  Protestant  Churches  had  participated  in  all  the 
fluctuations  of  religious  liberty.    After  having  obtained 
from  the  Constituent  Assembly,  all  possible  reparation 
for  the  great  act  of  cruel  oppression  which  Louis  XIV. 
had  inflicted  upon  them,  they  enjoyed  the  privilege  of 
public  worship  as  long  as  the  right  of  conscience  was 
respected.    Protestantism  was  not  regarded  as  favora- 
ble to  the  ancient  regime,  and  encountered  no  prejudices 
on  the  part  of  the  first  revolutionists.    With  the  excep- 
tion of  a  few  large  cities,  as  Montauban  and  Ximes,  the 
Protestants  consisted,  in  good  part,  not  of  the  peasantry, 
but  of  that  liberal  and  energetic  citizen-class  which  de-' 
sired  to  found  in  France,  not  the  demagogy  of  the  Ter- 

40 


314        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

rorists,  but  the  reign  of  true  liberty.  Barnave  had 
represented  and  nobly  served  them  in  the  Constituent 
Assembly.  Rabaut  St.  Etienne  had  also  acted  there  an 
equally  honorable  though  less  brilliant  part.  In  the 
Convention,  the  young  Pastor  Lasource  had  stood 
among  the  first  ranks  of  the  Girondists,  and  had  per- 
ished on  the  scaffold  with  Rabaut.  Both  in  Alsace  and 
in  Gard  the  interests  of  Protestantism  had  largely  suf- 
fered during  the  delirium  of  the  Revolution.  There  is 
never  a  large  body  of  men  which  does  not  include  a  few 
violent  or  ignoble  individuals  who  hide  their  true  quali- 
ties in  times  of  peace,  but  who  discover  themselves 
when  the  hour  of  trial  arrives.  It  is  not,  therefore,  as- 
tonishing that  Protestantism  as  well  as  Catholicism  had 
to  mourn  over  shameful  defections  and  apostasies.  It 
had  lost  much  of  the  fervor  which  had  once  inspired  it 
with  a  noble  heroism.  The  pale  and  cold  Deism  which 
had  invaded  England  and  Germany  began  to  affect  it. 
Finding  sympathy  and  tolerance  only  in  the  camp  of 
the  philosophers,  it  had  to  some  extent  yielded  to  their 
influence.  The  ancient  belief  of  course  remained,  but  it 
had  been  shaken.  Many  a  heart  once  full  of  ardent 
faith,  was  filled  with  revolutionary  passions.  Matthew 
Dumas,  in  his  mission  of  pacification,  at  the  time  of  the 
troubles  at  Toulouse  and  Montauban  in  1790,  reports 
that  he  found  not  a  little  hinderance  to  his  work  in 
several  violent  Protestants.  He  mentions  in  particular 
a  preacher  at  Toulouse,  Jean  Bon  St.  Andre,  afterward 
a  fanatical  Terrorist  member  of  the  Convention,  who 
responded  thus  to  his  prudent  counsel :  "  It  is  now  more 
than  a  hundred  years  that  we  have  been  waiting  the 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  315 

hour  of  vengeance."    A  man  like  this  had  already  re- 
nounced the  spirit  of  ja,  religion  which  commands  to  for- 
give one's  enemies.    It  was  a  colleague  of  him,  Julien, 
who  seconded  Bishop  Gobel  on  the  infamous  day  of  the 
public  apostasies.    And  the  example  was  not  without 
imitators.    The  Protestant  Church  of  Paris  had  freely 
sympathized  with  the  Revolution.     The  Legislative 
Assembly  had  attended,  in  a  body,  a  solemn  service  of 
thanksgiving  held  in  his  church  by  the  Pastor  Marron. 
Unfortunately,  this  Church  did  not  remain  faithful  dur- 
ing the  time  of  the  orgies  of  Hebert  and  Chaumettc  ; 
the  sacerdotal  cups,  as  well  as  the  baptismal  vases,  were 
carried  to  the  mint  in  the  name  of  the  Church  officers. 
Thanks  to  God,  these  disgraces  were  neither  many  nor 
lasting.    The  majority  of  the  clergy  remained  firm  in 
the  faith.    Simple  peasants  often  distinguished  them- 
selves by  their  fidelity.    Rabaut  the  Younger  cites  a 
touching  example.     In  Gard  an  aged  cultivator  had 
been  thrown  into  prison  for  having  ceased  his  labor  on 
the  Sabbath.    The  next  Sabbath  he  presented  himself  in 
Sunday  attire  to  the  authorities,  and  asked  them  to  im- 
prison him  again,  saying  that  he  could  not  work  on  that 
day.    During  the  period  between  the  establishment  of 
the  Directory  and  its  overthrow  by  Bonaparte  the  Prot- 
estant Churches  were  in  a  state  of  reconstruction.  They 
shared  in  the  misfortunes  of  the  times,  but  a  revival  of 
»  fa i  tli  would  have  soon  placed  them  in  prosperity.  It 
was  surely  not  the  Concordat  which  recalled  them  to 
life,  for  this  served  only  to  confine  them  in  galling 
bonds.    Protestantism  was  erect  and  active,  as  well  as 
Catholicism,  before  the  hour  when  Napoleon  conde- 


316        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

scended  to  meddle  with  religion  only  to  put  it  into 
chains. 

It  seems  to  us  that  the  facts  of  this  chapter  sufficiently 
refute  the  oft-repeated  assertion,  that  it  was  the  First 
Consul  who  raised  the  altars  out  of  the  dust  into  which 
they  had  been  cast  by  the  revolutionary  infidels.  The 
Bishops  of  the  Gallican  Church,  in  their  assembly  at 
Paris  in  1799,  seem  to  have  foreseen  this  falsification  of 
history,  so  obstinately  maintained  by  sycophantic  and 
inveterate  prejudice,  when  they  inserted  these  emphatic 
words  in  their  circular  letter :  "  There  is  no  more  relig- 
ion /  Let  us  efface  this  blasphemy."  And  it  is  in  fact  a 
blasphemy  to  make  religion  depend  on  politics,  and 
falsely  to  attribute  its  revival  to  a  happy  calculation  of 
reviving  despotism. 


BOOK  FOURTH. 


THE  CONCORDAT. 


CHAPTER  L 

PREPARATION  FOR  THE  CONCORDAT. 

Whatever  by  its  greatness  transcends  the  ordinary 
standards  of  men  and  things  is  usually  magnified  still 
further,  and  as  it  were  transfigured,  by  the  imagination 
of  the  public ;  in  respect  to  such  phenomena  the  legend 
is  almost  contemporary  with  history.  Such  is  the  case 
with  that  marvelous  epoch  of  our  history  which  saw 
rise  so  suddenly  out  of  the  whirlpool  of  revolution  a  re- 
gime oi  power  and  order,  encircled  at  its  very  dawn  with 
that  radiant  halo  of  military  glory  which  is  so  dear  to 
the  French.  From  the  very  start  to  the  final  grand  ca- 
tastrophe of  this  incomparable  reign  which  includes  in 
itself  all  successes  and  all  reverses,  every  thing  tended 
to  give  it  an  ideal  character,  and  to  assimilate  it  to 
sublime  classic  tragedy.  In  admiring  what  was  great, 
however,  we  run  into  danger  of  excusing  what  was  fatal, 
on  the  ground  that  punishment  followed  closely  upon 
the  faults,  and  that  that  which  was  but  transitory 
should  not  be  severely  judged.  In  this  we  forget  that 
the  spirit  of  a  reign  may  survive  it,  and  that  nothing  is 


31 8        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

more  pernicious  for  a  nation  than  a  false  ideal,  than 
blind  admirations  which  corrupt  the  moral  sense  and 
pervert  history.  The  memory  of  Napoleon  has  too  long 
floated  between  the  indiscriminating  extremes  of  adora- 
tion and  hate — a  proof  that  the  just  judgment  is  not  yet 
attained.  Idolatrous  worshipers  give  occasion  for  fanat- . 
ical  enemies.  The  time  has  come  for  an  equitable  appre- 
ciation. We  should  not  wait  for  disasters  before  de- 
nouncing wrongs,  but  rather  signalize  in  the  very  start, 
in  the  midst  of  the  splendid  triumphs  of  this  extraordi- 
nary man,  the  shadow  which  finally  obscured  every  thing, 
namely,  that  insolent  contempt  of  every  superior  princi- 
ple, of  all  right,  of  all  liberty.  The  pax*tial  outbreaks  of 
despotism,  however  odious  sometimes,  are  yet  infinitely 
4ess  grave  than  the  active  genius  which  inspires  them. 
Now,  never  has  this  genius  appeared  more  complete, 
more  resolute,  than  in  tho  person  of  the  young  general 
who  overthrew  the  Directory  by  the  coup  cPHat  of 
Brumaire.  This  will  appear  clearly  from  the  sketch 
which  we  propose  to  draw  of  his  policy  in  matters  of 
religion. 

Ordinarily  the  period  of  the  Consulate  from  No- 
vember 9th,  1799,  to  May  18th,  1804,  is  set  apart  for 
special  praise,  because  of  the  wisdom,  patriotism,  and 
reparative  power  which  characterized  it.  Prominent 
among  the  acts  of  this  period  which  have  been  highly 
lauded,  is  the  Concordat  which  the  First  Consul  made 
with  the  Pope.  Both  from  this  general  appreciation  of 
the  period  of  the  Consulate,  and  from  the  particular  esti- 
mation of  this  special  act,  we  beg  leave  to  dissent.  It 
is  not  a  fact  that  the  Consulate  was  truly  reparative  ;  it 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  319 

prepared  the  way  for  all  that  followed ;  and  if  arbitrary 
power  was  not  yet  fully  established,  it  is  because  the 
despot  was  waiting  for  the  fruit  to  ripen  before  plucking 
it ;  but,  like  a  skillful  cultivator,  he  spared  no  pains  to 
bring  about  this  desired  result.  If  by  a  reparative  gov- 
ernment is  meant,  a  government  which,  putting  a  stop  to 
tyranny,  makes  to  be  felt  anew  the  curb  of  law,  represses 
by  a  prompt  and  well-organized  police  the  greatest  of 
disorders,  gives  security  to  private  individuals,  restores 
prosperity  to  the  finances,  and  in  a  word,  gives  to  the 
country,  with  internal  tranquillity,  a  peace  crowned  with 
the  glory  of  a  Marengo,  we  are  ready  to  accord  this 
praise  to  the  Consulate.  We  understand  very  well  that 
France,  wearied  and  humiliated  under  the  Directory, 
could  feel  deep  and  ardent  thankfulness  for  these  bene- 
fits, and  overlook  the  price  at  which  they  were  bought ; 
could  so  ardently  feel  the  necessity  of  social  order  and 
security  as  to  accept  with  enthusiasm  a  despotism  which 
was  absolute  from  the  very  start.  In  fact,  during  this 
whole  period  the  word  republic  was  nothing  more  than 
an  empty  sound,  one  of  those  cunning  deceptions  of 
which  Augustus  made  so  skillful  a  use.  To  escape  from 
revolutionary  agitation  was  the  deep,  universal  desire. 

The  new  power  satisfied  perfectly  this  desire,  though  in 
a  superficial  and  precarious  way.  It  is  at  this  point  that 
it  was  not  reparative ;  for  military  despotism  substituted 
for  anarchy  is  revolution  still,  with  all  its  worst  fea- 
tures, with  its  predilections  and  passions,  all  the  more 
dangerous  as  they  meet  with  no  restraint  to  their  ready 
indulgence.  It  is  anarchy  from  above  in  the  place  of  the 
anarchy  of  the  masses ;  it  is  the  principle  of  disorder  in 


320        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

the  central  force,  which,  because  of  the  order  that  rules 
in  the  subordinate  parts  of  the  administrative  machine, 
renders  it  so  much  the  more  easy  for  the  errors  or 
crimes  of  the  chief  of  the  State  to  be  executed  with  a 
remorseless  and  irremediable  facility.  I  know  of  no 
more  perilous  combination  than  arbitrariness  in  the  di- 
recting chief,  and  regularity  in  the  subordinate  instru- 
ments. Now  this  was  precisely  the  politics  of  the  Con- 
sulate, as  it  was  afterward  the  spirit  of  the  Empire.  The 
results  of  the  reign  of  Napoleon  suffice  to  convince  us 
that  there  is  no  truly  reparative  regime  but  that  of 
liberty,  that  is  to  say,  the  regime  of  law,  under  the  con- 
trol of  the  real  representatives  of  the  people.  I  call 
reparative  the  government  of  a  William  of  Orange,  or 
the  presidency  of  a  Washington,  because  these  great 
men  founded  society  on  the  respect  for  right,  and  gave 
to  it  for  safeguard  a  well-regulated  liberty,  that  is,  a 
liberty  which  regulates  itself;  on  the  contrary,  I  call 
anarchical  and  destructive  every  regime  of  mere  good 
pleasure,  whether  it  be  democratic,  aristocratic,  republi- 
can, or  monarchical ;  and  I  regard  it  all  the  more  dan- 
gerous in  proportion  as  it  has  more  cunningly  organized 
the  country  it  controls.  Remorseless  facts  demonstrate 
these  principles.  France,  conquered  and  humiliated  so 
low  as  to  treat  with  the  enemy  in  her  own  capital,  is  a 
cruel  and  bloody  lesson  for  those  who  separate  order 
and  peace  from  liberty,  and  who  imagine  that  great 
military  exploits  suffice  to  regenerate  and  strengthen  a 
nation.  I  do  not  deny  that  the  government  of  Napo- 
leon accepted  and  consecrated  some  of  the  precious 
conquests  of  the  Revolution ;  it  firmly  maintained  law 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  321 

for  all  ranks  and  sects,  the  admission  of  all  classes  to 
the  public  service,  the  abolition  of  religious  privileges, 
and  equality  as  far  as  it  could  exist  without  liberty. 
But  for  liberty  it  had  no  tolerance  whatever.  It  is, 
therefore,  a  mockery  to  describe  the  government  of  Na- 
poleon as  a  representative  of  the  principles  of  1789. 
The  First  Consul  has  clearly  enough  explained  himself 
on  this  head.  At  the  time  of  the  vote  giving  him  the 
Consulate  for  life,  Lafayette  and  La  Tour  Maubourg 
placed  their  votes  on  the  condition  that  the  liberty  of 
the  press  should  be  guaranteed.  "  Judge  from  that," 
said  Napoleon  to  one  of  his  confidants,  "  how  much  is 
to  be  expected  from  those  men  who  are  always  making 
a  hobby  of  the  metaphysics  of  1*789.  Liberty  of  the 
press  !  "  An  ironical  smile  expressed  well  the  extent  of 
his  respect  for  this  great  liberty. 

The  Consular  Constitution  is  the  masterpiece  of  that 
political  school  which  puts  the  arbitrary  at  the  head, 
and  a  cunning  organization  in  the  body,  of  the  govern- 
ment, substituting  for  the  parliament  which  controls,  an 
administration  which  executes  and  gives  to  the  will  of 
the  sovereign,  not  a  counterpoise  which  checks,  but  a 
marvelous  organism  for  the  instantaneous  realization  of 
its  volitions.  A  guiding  head  and  strong,  docile  arms, 
a  single  will  and  supple  instruments,  such  were  the 
essence  of  the  system.  In  the  main  this  constitution 
was  the  work  of  Sieyes.  It  placed  all  real  power  in  the 
hands  of  the  executive  chief,  and  based  the  government 
on  the  merest  mockery  of  popular  elections.  It  pnt  a 
stop  to  all  free  parliamentary  discussion,  and  the  Council 
of  the  executive  was  powerless  to  do  any  thing  but  give 

41 


322        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

advice.  But  advice  was  of  little  avail.  What  was 
needed  was  not  so  much  advice  as  a  real  limitation  of 
the  executive  volition.  As  it  was,  the  only  man  in 
France  who  enjoyed  full  freedom  was  he  who  had  in 
his  hands  also  absolute  power.  From  this  head  every 
thing  proceeded,  and  to  him  every  thing  returned.  It 
would  have  been  better  not  to  interpose  between  him 
and  the  country  that  phantom  of  national  representa- 
tion which  served  only  to  give  an  appearance  of  legality 
to  his  merest  caprices.  The  Revolution  had  given  him 
a  country  entirely  dissolved  into  its  simplest  elements, 
and  without  those  great  corporate  bodies  which  always 
impose  some  check  on  despotism.  The  part  of  the  Con- 
sular system  most  highly  lauded  is  doubtless  that  which 
organized  the  internal  administration,  but  it  was  pre- 
cisely this  which  served  so  efficaciously  to  enslave  the 
nation.  The  executive  chief,  by  means  of  his  prefects, 
sub-prefects,  and  mayors,  was  present  in  every  part  of 
the  nation.  This  system  made  all  the  resources  of  the 
circumference  converge  to  the  center,  and  bore  back 
from  the  center  the  decisions  of  sovereign  power,  thus 
establishing  the  most  perfect  order  in  servitude.  The 
stroke  of  a  single  hand  at  the  center  was  instantly  felt 
in  all  the  ramifications  of  the  administrative  organism 
The  wise  management  of  the  treasury  would  have  been 
a  signal  benefit,  had  it  in  some  degree  been  left  in  the 
control  of  the  nation ;  but  as  it  was,  it  became  an  occa- 
sion of  evil  by  putting  into  the  hands  of  an  irresponsible 
master  the  means  of  daring  every  thing.  The  judica- 
ture was  wisely  organized,  though  it  was  powerless 
against  absolutism.    In  fine,  France  possessed  in  this 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  323 

system  of  centralization  without  counterpoise  the  most 
perfect  organization  of  despotism  which  ever  existed,  a 
Bystem  which  still  continues  to  be  the  most  formidable 
obstacle  to  a  return  to  liberty.  The  Civil  Code  consti- 
tutes one  of  the  brightest  glories  of  this  epoch,  but  this 
wise  digest  would  have  lost  nothing  in  value  had  it 
given  better  guarantees  to  personal  liberty.  It  is  in- 
fected with  the  vice  of  the  government.  When  taken 
in  connection  with  the  criminal  code  it  furnished  many 
resources  to  despotism. 

From  the  beginning  of  the  Consulate  it  was  easy  to 
foresee  to  what  extremes  the  intoxication  of  absolute 
power  would  lead  the  ambitious  chief.  After  the  failure 
of  an  attempt  at  assassination,  he  declared  in  open  State 
Council  that  he  would  put  himself  above  the  law  in 
order  to  strike  a  grand  blow  at  the  Jacobins,  though  he 
knew  perfectly  that  they  had  nothing  to  do  with  the 
conspiracy,  saying  in  self-justification  that  royalist  in- 
trigues were  a  mere  skin-disease,  whereas  the  Jacobin 
spirit  was  an  internal,  deep-seated  malady,  which  needed 
a  radical  cure.  To  those  who  opposed  to  these  iniqui- 
tous measures  the  principles  of  simple  justice,  he  ex- 
claimed bluntly,  "The  metaphysicians  are  a  class  of 
men  to  whom  we  owe  all  our  evils  !  I  must  treat  this 
matter  as  a  statesman."  And  he  dared  to  say  this  in 
the  hall  where  laws  were  made !  Thus  we  find  trans- 
mitted from  the  ancient  regime  to  the  Terrorists,  and 
from  the  Terrorists  to  Bonaparte,  this  pernicious  doc- 
trine of  public  safety ;  which  is  nothing  more  nor  less 
than  the  will  of  the  stronger  determined  on  accomplish- 
ing his  own  good  pleasure.    This  malady  of  the  interior 


324        Religion  and,  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

which  the  First  Consul  wished  to  cure,  had  never  offered 
a  worse  phase  than  that  of  sacrificing  eternal  right  to 
the  passions  of  the  moment,  and  had  presented  few 
more  criminal  manifestations  than  that  armed  abduction 
and  murder  in  March,  1804,  of  Conde,  the  Due  d'En- 
ghien,  which  was  so  coolly  accomplished,  and  afterward, 
more  coolly  still,  discussed  and  justified  as  an  excellent 
measure  for  deterring  the  enemies  of  the  new  power. 
It  was  very  fortunate  that  Bonaparte  was  not  cruel  by 
nature,  for  the  nation  "had  no  other  guarantee  than  his 
temperament.  Every  treaty  which  he  signed  was  pre- 
carious. He  made  it  for  the  moment  for  the  sake  of 
convenience,  and  when  it  was  his  pleasure  he  broke  it. 
He  was  the  genius  of  war,  and  the  blood  and  treasure 
of  France  were  at  his  disposal.  For  a  man  like  Napo- 
leon, the  temptation  to  use  to  excess  his  power  was 
almost  irresistible.  And  his  counselors  seconded  his 
natural  proclivity.  The  spirit  of  the  Consular  govern- 
ment is  well  expressed  in  this  saying  of  its  chief,  "  There 
must  be  no  opposition." 

It  is  certain  that  from  the  day  of  the  entrance  of  the 
First  Consul  into  the  Tuileries,  he  cherished  only  a 
single  thought — to  consolidate  and  perpetuate  his  abso- 
lute authority.  The  memoirs  of  the  times  abound  in 
sarcastic  allusions  at  the  progress  of  the  political 
comedy.  Nothing  could  be  more  bungling  than  the 
first  essays  at  a  princely  court  at  Malmaison  and  St. 
Cloud.  Novice  courtiers  made  sorry  attempts  at  the 
toilet  of  dukes  or  counts.  The  coarse  language  of  the 
Clubs  contrasted  sadly  with  fawning  flatteries  from  the 
same  mouth.    On  his  return  from  a  triumphal  tour  in 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  325 

Belgium  and  Normandy,  the  First  .Consul  remarked  to 
his  brother,  "  I  have  been  able  to  learn  all  the  abjectness 
of  the  French,  and  to  assure  myself  that  I  can  obtain 
from  their  servility  all  that  it  may  please  me  to  ask." 
His  first  demands,  however,  exceeded  proper  bounds. 
Jealous  of  personal  power,  he  was  unwilling  even  to 
found  a  dynasty,  so  that  he  might  be  perfectly  free  to 
transmit  his  crown  to  whomever  he  should  please,  and 
that  there  might  not  be  a  single  regulation  for  the  future 
before  which  he  should  have  to  yield.  This  determina- 
tion raised  the  most  violent  storms  in  his  family,  and 
made  him  to  be  cursed  in  wrath  by  gentle  and  pacific 
men  like  his  brother  Joseph.  These  sad  scenes  are  re- 
produced in  the  curious  memoirs  of  Miot  de  Melitto. 
They  enable  us  to  understand  the  following  sad  words 
of  the  author,  which,  moreover,  are  but  a  true  echo  of 
the  sentiments  of  many  eminent  men  of  that  day : 
"  What  a  sad  end  for  that  Revolution  which  was  begun 
with  such  an  enthusiasm  for  liberty,  such  a  generous 
patriotism  !  What !  so  much  blood  shed  on  the  battle- 
field and  on  the  scaffold,  so  many  fortunes  destroyed,  so 
many  sacrifices  of  all  that  man  holds  dear,  shall  these 
only  end  in  giving  us  a  change  of  masters,  in  substitut- 
ing a  family  unknown  ten  years  ago,  and  which  was 
scarcely  French  at  the  opening  of  the  Revolution,  in  the 
place  of  Jhe  dynasty  which  has  ruled  over  France  for 
eight  centuries !  Is,  then,  our  condition  so  miserable 
that  we  have  no  refuge  but  in  despotism  ?  Have  we  no 
resource  against  our  evils  but  in  giving  to  the  Bona- 
partes  every  thing,  without  receiving  any  guarantee  in 
return  ? "     And  what  adds   special  force   to  these 


326        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

words  is,  that  they  were  written  by  a  Counselor  of 
State. 

It  was  of  importance  for  our  purpose  to  describe  the 
political  situation  which  gave  birth  to  the  Concordat. 
It,  as  well  as  all  the  other  measures  of  this  epoch,  was 
the  offspring  of  personal  ambition,  and  simply  formed  a 
part  of  that  scheme  of  reaction  and  monarchical  restora- 
tion which  was  so  deeply  conceived,  and  so  energeti- 
cally executed,  by  General  Bonaparte.  Lafayette  ex- 
pressed its  true  character  the  day  he  addressed  to  the 
First  Consul,  in  allusion  to  his  negotiations  with  the 
Pope,  this  playful  remark :  "  You  desire  to  get  the  little 
phial  broken  upon  your  head."  "We  shall  see,  we 
shall  see,"  replied  Bonaparte.  Bourrienne,  in  relating 
this  anecdote,  adds  :  "  Such  was  the  real  origin  of  the 
Concordat."  And  this  can  scarcely  be  doubted,  when 
we  consider  the  religious  opinions  of  the  First  Consul, 
as  gathered  from  his  correspondence  and  from  his  occa- 
sional blunt  remarks,  whether  in  privacy  or  in  open 
council.  Religion  is  always  regarded  by  him  as  an 
instrument  of  government,  a  means  of  controlling  and 
winning  the  masses.  He  assigns  to  himself  the  first 
place  in  that  domain  which  belongs  to  God  alone.  We 
cannot  certainly  accuse  him  of  Atheism ;  his  strong  in- 
telligence rejected  the  absurdity  of  supposing  a  world 
so  marvelous  as  ours  to  be  the  offspring  of  cWance.  "  It 
is  the  privilege  of  intelligence,"  says  well  the  historian 
Thiers,  "to  recognize  marks  of  intelligence  in  the  uni- 
verse ;  and  a  great  mind  is  more  capable  than  a  narrow 
one  of  seeing  God  in  his  works."  Moreover,  Atheism 
is  the  enemy  of  order,  subordination,  and  obedience  in 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  327 

the  State  as  well  as  in  the  Church,  and  for  this  reason  it 
could  not  fail  to  displease  the  intensely-governmental 
genius  of  Napoleon.  Open  rebellion  against  the  Sover- 
eign of  the  skies  would  have  . been  a  bad  social  example. 
The  Consul  was,  therefore,  sincere  whenever  he  spoke 
of  the  Divine  Majesty  as  it  is  revealed  in  the  spectacle 
of  creation,  or  in  that  starry  heaven  which,  on  one  occa- 
sion, he  pointed  out  to  Monge  with  unfeigned  emotion. 
But  more  than  this  we  must  not  demand  of  the  man  of 
war  and  politics.  This  religious  sentiment,  which,  vague 
as  it  was,  made  itself  felt  in  his  soul,  he  determined  to 
make  use  of,  not  so  much  in  satisfying  it,  as  in  making  it 
contribute  to  his  personal  advancement.  Now  this  was 
the  surest  way  of  misconceiving  and  violating  it. 
Whenever  religion  is  viewed  not  as  the  supreme  end, 
but  as  a  means  of  realizing  temporal  or  personal  ends,  it 
is  misconceived  in  its  very  essence.  We  love  to  believe 
that  on  the  rock  of  St.  Helena  a  divine  ray  penetrated 
the  tormented  heart  of  the  great  captive  ;  but^t  is  cer- 
tain that  up  to  the  day  of  his  fall,  he  considered  religion 
only  in  its  relations  to  his  politics,  and  that  he  gave  it 
his  protection  or  disfavor  according  as  he  found  it  more 
useful  to  his  interests.  In  religion,  as  in  every  thing 
else,  he  saw  only  himself,  and  himself  alone.  Before,  as 
well  as  after,  the  Concordat,  the  same  view  pervades  his 
discourses.  The  young  man,  who  is  yet  only  a  general 
of  fortune,  expresses  himself  as  the  chief  of  a  great  em- 
pire. Of  him  in  regard  to  religion  we  have  acts  and  words 
of  the  most  contrary  character,  according  to  the  occasion.* 
During  his  first  campaign  in  Italy,  when  he  had  to 
*  See  Appendix,  note  42. 


328        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

deal  with  the  dignitaries  of  the  Church,  he  spoke  with 
profound  respect  of  the  beauty  and  of  the  spirit  of  the 
Gospel;  but  this  did  not  hinder  him  on  his  return  to 
Paris,  when  he  was  in  the  presence  of  an  administration 
which  was  the  sworn  enemy  of  Christianity,  and  of  a 
scoffing  populace  which  held  the  same  opinions,  from 
ranking  among  the  chief  benefits  of  the  Revolution  the 
destruction  of  religion  itself.  The  following  words  form 
the  beginning  of  the  discourse  he  pronounced  when  pre- 
sented to  the  Directory,  namely :  "  The  FreSch  people, 
in  order  to  obtain  a  constitution  founded  on  reason,  had 
to  conquer  eighteen  centuries  of  "prejudice.  The  consti- 
tution of  1795,  and  yourselves,  have  triumphed  over 
these  obstacles.  Religion,  feudalism,  and  royalty  have 
successively  governed  Europe  for  twenty  centuries ; 
but  from  the  peace  which  you  have  just  concluded  will 
date  the  era  of  representative  governments."  We  see 
here  religion  placed  on  the  same  footing  as  feudalism 
and  rojfclty,  and  classed  among  the  scourges  of  the 
human  race.  The  young  general  now  passed  with  his 
army  into  Egypt.  On  his  way  he  captured  Malta,  and 
addressed  some  pious  words  to  the  Bishop  of  the  island, 
so  as  to  render  as  palatable  as  possible  his  recommenda- 
tions of  a  prompt  submission  to  the  new  power.  But 
scarcely  had  he  set  foot  on  the  land  of  the  pyramids 
when  he  addressed  to  his  soldiers  a  famous  proclama- 
tion, in  which  he  recommended  them  to  act  among  the 
people  who  believe  the  Koran  as  they  had  acted  among 
Christians  and  Jews,  and  to  show  to  their  Muftis  and 
Imans  the  same  respect  which  they  had  shown  to  Bishops 
and  Rabbis  in  Europe.    "Show,"  said  he,  "the  same 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  329 

toleration  for  the  ceremonies  prescribed,  by  the  Koran, 
,  and  for  the  mosques,  as  you  have  done  for  the  convents 
and  the  synagogues,  for  the  religion  of  Moses  and  that 
of  Christ."  In  an  address  to  the  Egyptians  he  spoke  of 
the  sentiments  of  the  French  in  these  words  :  "  We  too 
are  true  Mussulmans.  Was  it  not  we  who  destroyed 
the  Pope,  him  who  said  that  war  must  be  made  upon 
the  Mussuknans  ?  Was  it  not  we  who  destroyed  the 
Knights  of  Malta,  because  those  idiots  believed  that 
God  had  decreed  that  they  should  make  war  upon  the 
Mussulmans  ? "  He  was  not  content  with  neutrality, 
but  even  desired  that  one  of  the  great  Mohammedan 
festivals  should  be  celebrated  at  Cairo  with  more  than 
usual  pomp.  Thus  in  some  respect  he  realized  the 
famous  verse  of  Voltaire  in  his  Zaire,  and  was  a  Chris- 
tian in  Italy,  a  free-thinker  at  Paris,  and  a  Mussulman 
on  the  shores  of  the  Nile. 

At  a  later  time,  even  after  the  Concordat,  he  ex- 
plained his  views  in  open  State  Council  with  all  de- 
sirable clearness.  "  As  to  me,"  said  he,  "  it  is  not  the 
mystery  of  the  incarnation  that  I  see  in  religion,,  but 
the  mystery  of  social  order ;  it  attributes  to  Heaven  the 
doctrine  of  equality  which  prevents  the  rich  from  being 
massacred  by  the  poor.  Religion  is,  moreover,  a  sort 
of  vaccine  inoculation,  which,  by  satisfying  our  taste 
for  the  marvelous,  insures  us  against  becoming  the 
dupes  of  quacks  and  sorcerers ;  the  priests  are  of  more 
account  than  the  Cagliostros,  the  Kants,  and  all  the 
dreamers  of  Germany."  In  the  eyes  of  Napoleon  this 
mystery   of  social   order  was   simply  submission  to 

the  civil  power.    This  was  for  hrm  the  essential  doc- 

42  . 


330        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror, 

trine,  the  foundation  itself,  of  religion.  Now  it  was 
in  the  priests  that  he  found  the  most  efficient  police  for 
enforcing  this  dogma  of  civil  submission.  When  the 
Emperor  of  Austria  heard  of  the  conclusion  of  the 
second  Concordat,  he  exclaimed  that  he  approved  highly 
of  Napoleon's  policy,  that  he  knew  by  experience  that 
priests  could  not  be  dispensed  with  in  a  well-ordered 
State,  and  that,  for  himself,  he  needed,  in  orcter  to  make 
his  authority  respected,  the  services  of  two  armies, 
one  white,  and  the  other  black.  On  that  day  the  two 
Emperors  understood  each  other.  To  this  same  utili- 
tarian view  of  religion  Napoleon  constantly  recurred  in 
his  speeches  and  correspondence.  While  yet  a  republi- 
can general  he  praised  those  priests  "  who  held  that  the 
political  code  of  the  Gospel  consisted  in  the  liberty  and 
supremacy  of  the  people,  and  who  sought  to  quiet,  in- 
stead of  agitating,  the  masses."  In  fact,  by  holding  this 
democratic  position,  they  served  his  policy  of  the  mo- 
ment, which  was  to  found  republics  in  Italy,  and  he 
wearied  not  in  praising  them.  He  compared  them  to 
Fenelon,  and  declared  that  "  such  priests  were  the  finest 
gift  which  Heaven  could  present  to  a  government." 
The  fact  was,  he  loved  this  republicanism  of  the  priests 
only  as  a  sign  of  their  readiness  to  accept  what  he  dic- 
tated. He  did  not  long  require  this  particular  political 
faith  of  them,  and  the  cardinal  virtue  which  he  most 
admired  in  them  was  their  willingness  to  conform  to 
the  changes  of  the  civil  power.  "  I  know  of  no  charac- 
ter more  respectable,  more  worthy  of  the  veneration  of 
men,"  so  wrote  he  to  the  Bishop  of  Malta  after  the  con- 
quest of  the  island,  "  than  that  of  a  priest  who,  full  oi 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  331 


the  true  spirit  of  the  Gospel,  feels  it  to  be  his  duty  to 
obey  the  civil  power,  and  to  maintain  peace  in  his 
diocese." 

The  true  thought  of  Napoleon,  that  which  inspired 
the  Concordat,  is  clearly  revealed  in  the  wcrds  which  he 
addressed  to  the  priests  of  Milan  in  June,  1800,  on  the 
eve  of  the  battle  of  Marengo.    He  speaks  for  Paris  and 
for  Rome,  and  tfee  discourse  is  a  sort  of  preface  to  the 
Concordat.    "  I  have  desired  to  see  you  all  in  a  body," 
said  he,  "  that  I  might  have  the  satisfaction  of  informing 
you  personally  of  the  sentiments  which  animate  me  in 
regard  to  the  Apostolical  Roman  Catholic  religion. 
Convinced  that  this  religion  is  the  only  one  which  can 
procure  true  happiness  to  a  well-ordered  society,  and 
strengthen  the  basis  of  good  government,  I  assure  you 
that  I  shall  apply  myself  to  protect  and  defend  it  at  all 
times,  and  by  all  means.    You,  the  ministers  of  that 
religion,  which  is  verily  also  my  own,  I  esteem  as 
my  dearest  friends.    I  declare  to  you  that  I  will  hold 
as  a  disturber  of  the  public  peace,  and  as  an  enemy  of 
the  common  good,  and  that  as  such  I  will  punish  in  the 
most  rigorous  manner,  and  even,  if  need  be,  with  the 
pain  of  death,  whosoever  shall  disparage  in  the  slightest 
manner  our  common  religion,  or  shall  allow  himself  the 
least  indignity  against  your  sacred  persons.    My  formal 
intention  is,  that  the  Catholic  religion  shall  be  preserved 
in  its  entirety,  that  it  shall  be  publicly  exercised,  and 
that  it  shall  continue  in  the  enjoyment  of  this  right  as 
fully  and  as  inviolably  as  at  the  time  when  I  first  en- 
tered these  favored  lands.     Now  that  I  possess  full 
powers,  I  am  determined  to  make  use  of  all  the  means 


332        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

which  I  shall  deem  most  fit  for  assuring  and  guarantee 
ing  that  religion.  Modern  philosophers  have  striven  to 
persuade  France  that  Catholicism  is  the  implacable 
enemy  of  all  republican  government.  Hence  resulted 
that  cruel  persecution  which  the  republic  inflicted  on 
this  religion  and  its  ministers  ;  hence  all  those  horrors  to 
which  that  unfortunate  nation  has  been  a  prey.  The 
diversity  of  opinion  on  matters  of  religfbn  which  reigned 
in  France  at  the  time  of  the  Revolution  was  one  of  the 
chief  causes  of  those  disorders.  Experience  has  dis- 
abused the  French.  For  my  part,  I  also  am  a  philoso- 
pher, and  I  know  that  in  any  society  whatever  no  man 
can  pass  for  just  or  virtuous  who  is  ignorant  of  whence 
he  came,  and  of  whither  he  is  to  go.  Reason  alone 
cannot  teach  him  that.  Without  religion  we  continu- 
ally grope  in  darkness,  and  the  Catholic  religion  is  the 
only  one  which  gives  man  certain  light  as  to  his  origin 
and  ultimate  destiny.  No  society  can  exist  without 
morality ;  there  is  no  sound  morality  but  in  religion ; 
therefore  religion  alone  can  give  to  a  State  a  firm  and 
durable  support.  A  society  without  religion  is  like  a 
ship  without  a  compass.  France,  instructed  by  her 
misfortunes,  has  welcomed  back  to  her  bosom  the  Cath- 
olic religion.  I  cannot  deny  that  I  have  contributed  to 
this  good  work.  I  assure  you  that  the  French  churches 
have  been  reopened,  that  the  Catholic  religion  is  put- 
ting on  its  ancient  splendor,  and  that  the  people  behold 
with  reverence  the  holy  Pastors  returning  full  of  zeal 
into  the  midst  of  their  aband^ed  flocks.  When  I  shall 
be  able  to  speak  with  the  Pope,  I  hope  I  shall  have  the 
happiness  of  removing  all  the  obstacles  which  may  yet 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 


333 


interpose  between  France  and  her  entire  reconciliation 
with  the  head  of  the  Church.  Such  is  what  I  wished  to 
say  to  you  in  reference  to  the  Catholic  religion.  I  de- 
sire that  the  expression  of  these  sentiments  may  remain 
engraved  in  your  minds,  that  you  may  see  fit  to  put 
them  in  order,  and  that  they  be  given  to  the  public  by 
the  press,  in  order  that  my  dispositions  may  be  known  not 
only  in  France  and  Italy,  but  also  throughout  Europe." 

The  First  Consul  spoke  like  a  true  confessor  of  the 
faith.  He  was  speaking,  however,  for  the  purpose  of 
making  an  impression  on  Europe,  and  though  he  seemed 
so  thorough-going  in  his  orthodoxy,  yet  he  did  not  rise 
above  the  sphere  of  politics.  He  made  a  conciliatory 
advance  to  the  Catholic  Church,  and  he  counted  on  her 
responding  to  it.  It  was  an  affair  of  negotiation  which 
was  about  to  be. engaged  in  ;  it  was  the  act  of  a  states- 
man, in  which  the  Christian  had  nothing  to  do.  If  he, 
the  armed  representative  of  France,  fears  not  to  threaten 
the  pain  of  death  for  the  slightest  religious  offenses,  it  is 
because  the  orator,  as  was  his  custom,  made  himself  all 
things  to  all  men.  For  the  Italian  priests  he  made 
himself  an  Italian.  His  eye  was  on  the  momentary 
effect.  If  this  is  doubted,  we  have  only  to  listen  to  him 
a  few  months  later,  not  on  a  State  occasion  beneath  the 
vaults  of  the  cathedral  of  Milan,  but  at  Malmaison,  in 
familiar  conversation  with  his  friends.  It  was  at  the 
time  when  the  negotiations  with  Rome  were  in  full 
activity.  The  First  Consul  had  turned  the  conversa- 
tion to  matters  of  religion.  He  had  stigmatized  purely 
philosophical  opinions,  such  as  Deism,  with  the  epithet 
of  ideology,  which  for  him  was  the  highest  expression 

I 


334:        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror, 

of  contempt.  He  had  spoken  of  the  emotion  which  he 
had  recently  felt  on  hearing  the  church  bell  of  Rueil, 
and  concluded  with  the  words,  "  so  strong  is  the  force 
of  habit  and  education  ! "  A  man  so  occupied  as  Napo- 
leon does  not  speak  of  his  ideas  and  emotions  for  the 
mere  pleasure  of  expressing  them.  One  might  be  cer- 
tain that  he  had  a  hidden  but  definite  object  in  view. 
In  fact,  these  remarks  were  intended  as  a  preface  to  a 
grave  communication.  "  I  said  to  myself,"  added  he 
immediately,  "  what  a  deep  impression  must  such  things 
make  on  the  simple  and  credulous !  Answer  that,  you 
philosophers  and  theorists.  A  nation  must  have  a  re- 
ligion ;  this  religion  should  be  in  the  hands  of  the  gov- 
ernment. Fifty  emigrated  Bishops  who  are  in  the  pay 
of  the  English,  rule  now  the  French  clergy.  We  must 
destroy  their  influence,  and  to  this  end  the  influence  of 
the  Pope  is  necessary.  He  shall  depose  them,  or  induce 
them  to  resign.  It  shall  be  declared  that  the  Catholic 
religion  being  that  of  a  majority  of  the  French,  the 
government  prefers  to  regulate  its  exercise.  The  First 
Consul  will  nominate  five  Bishops,  the  Pope  will  ap- 
point them ;  they  will  choose  the  Curates,  and  the  State 
will  salary  them.  An  oath  will  be  exacted.  The  priests 
who  will  not  take  it  shall  be  banished.  It  may  be  said 
that  I  am  a  Papist.  I  am  nothing.  I  was  a  Moham- 
medan in  Egypt ;  I  shall  be  a  Catholic  here,  for  the  good 
of  the  people.  I  do  not  believe  in  religions,  but  the 
idea  of  a  God — "  And  pointing  to  the  skies  he  asked, 
"  Who  made  all  that  ?  "  He  then  proceeded  to  develop 
the  advantages  of  his  plan :  "  The  educated  classes  will 
not  oppose  Catholicism.    They  are  indifferent.    I  will 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  335 

spare  myself  great  obstacles  in  the  interior,  and  abroad 
I  will  be  able  by  means  of  the  Pope  to — "  He  arrested 
himself,  and  his  silence  was  significant.  He  then  closed 
the  conversation  abruptly  with  these  words :  "  There 
exists  no  longer  either  good  faith  or  religious  belief. 
It  is  an  affair  purely  political"  The  new  Cyrus  took 
care  by  this  frank  avowal  to  show  clearly  in  what  sense 
he  restored  religion.  He  often  repeated  to  his  secretary 
Bourrienne:  "You  will  see  what  profit  I  shall  derive 
of  the  priests."  For  the  rest,  he  was  fully  determined 
to  break  the  pride  of  "  these  sacred  personages,"  for 
wThom  he  had  expressed  in  Milan  such  an  entire  de- 
votion. At  the  very  moment  when  he  was  negotiating 
the  Concordat  he  remarked  one  day  to  Carnot,  on  occa- 
sion of  a  slight  show  of  clerical  opposition :  "  The  priests 
and  nobles  are  at  a  great  game.  If  I  should  let  loose 
upon  them  the  people,  they  would  all  be  devoured  in  the 
twinkling  of  an  eye." 

We  have  clearly  enough  shown  the  great  political 
reason  which  led  the  First  Consul  to  treat  with  the 
Pope :  he  wished  to  turn  to  his  profit  the  power  of  the 
religious  sentiment,  the  indestructibility  of  which  he 
clearly  saw.  Moreover,  he  could  not  have  left  religion 
in  the  enjoyment  of  liberty,  without  limiting  his  own 
arbitrary  power.  Rather  let  us  say,  religious  liberty  is 
not  possible  except  where  public  liberty,  in  its  widest 
sense,  exists  also.  For  what  is  a  free  Church  ?  Is  it 
not  an  association  which  comes  together  from  time  to 
time,  and  uses  the  liberty  of  writing  and  speaking  ?  It 
cannot  dispense  with  the  essential  rights  of  a  free  people 
— the  right  of  association  and  reunion,  the  liberty  of  the 


336        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

press,  and  all  the  other  attributes  of  modern  society.  w  It  is 
to  the  honor  of  religion  that  it  is  incapable  of  enjoying 
liberty  as  a  monopoly,  and  for  this  reason  it  is  the  in- 
terest of  the  Church  to  desire  it  for  all.  The  dictator 
of  Brumaire  was  logically  bound  to  impose  on  religion 
the  same  claims  which  he  was  forging  for  the  whole 
body  of  the  nation.  He  could  not  tolerate  the  abomi- 
nable disorder,  that  a  free  word  should  be  spoken  in  any 
point  of  the  country,  and  that  in  the  presence  of  his 
creature  Prefects  there  should  be  free  Bishops.  The  suf- 
ferance of  a  single  free  association  would  have  been  a 
blemish  on  the  map.  It- was  necessary  to  hasten  to  erase 
it,  in  order  to  celebrate  the  jubilee  of  a  perfected  central- 
ization, reaching  in  its  potency  from  one  frontier  to  the 
other.  The  same  hand  which  re-established  the  throne 
was  bound,  not  to  re-establish  the  altar,  (for  that  was 
already  erect,  and  never  had  purer  incense  burned  upon 
it,)  but  to  chain  it  to  the  throne.  In  his  mad  desire  for 
absolute  dominion  and  omnipotence,  the  great  Despot- 
could  not  consent  to  let  even  the  religious  domain 
escape  his  grasp.  But  he  was  soon  to  see,  that  it  it 
easier  to  attempt  such  a  usurpation  than  to  succeed  ir 
it.  Judge  of  it  by  the  following  bitter  words,  which 
reveal  the  difficulties  with  which  he  met  in  his  attempt 
to  obtain  the  lion's  share  of  every  thing.  "  See,"  said  he 
to  his  State  Council,  "  see  the  insolence  of  the  priests ; 
in  sharing  their  authority  with  what  they  call  the  tem- 
poral power,  they  reserve  to  themselves  the  right  of 
acting  on  the  intelligence,  the  nobler  part  of  man,  and 
presume  to  confine  me  to  acting  merely  on  the  body. 
They  keep  the  soul,  and  throw  me  the  carcass ! " 


Religion  and  the  Illujh  of  Terror.  337 

Alter  these  POOCfHinry  preliminaries,  we  hasten  to  state 
the  several  steps  in  the  negotiation  of  the  Concordat. 
It  was  necessary  to  deal  with  the  different  phases  of 
opinion  at  Paris  and  at  Rome.  For  the  first  and  mos 
difficult  negotiation  the  Consul  used  his  personal  in- 
fluence ;  for  the  rest  he  made  use  of  adroit  agents,  armed 
with  ambiguous  promises  and  efficacious  threats. 

We  have  seen  in  how  prosperous  a  condition  was  the 
Gallicau  Church  at  the  time  when  Xapoleon  overthrew 
the  Directory.  And  the  work  was  rapidly  going  for- 
ward. The  refractory  clergy  were  also  at  the  good 
work,  especially  in  the  West  and  South.  Though  the 
two  bodies  were  yet  far  from  united,  there  is  no  reason 
to  believe  that,  had  the  enjoyment  of  liberty  been  al- 
lowed, they  would  not  have  come  to  a  speedy  under- 
standing. At  all  events  the  Pope  could  have  brought 
it  about  by  fewer  concessions  than  were  eventually  ex- 
acted from  him  in  the  Concordat.  The  first  measures 
of  Xapoleon?s  government  were  of  a  beneficent  charac- 
ter. Commissions  appointed  to  hear  the  complaints  of 
the  banished  priests,  indicated  that  the  era  of  proscrip- 
tion was  past.  The  ashes  of  Pope  Pius  VX  were  deliv- 
ered to  his  former  subjects,  and  solemnly  transported  to 
Rorne.  Some  days  later  a  wise  decree  substituted,  in 
the  place  of  the  politico-religious  oath  which  had  created 
so  much  trouble,  a  simple,  formula  of  fidelity  to  the  Con- 
stitution, which  would  raise  no  conscientious  scruples. 
A  decree  opening  the  churches  to  Christian  vorship 
was  strictly  enforced.  For  a  moment  there  was  hope 
that  real  liberty  would  be  continued.    We  have  shown 

how  this  hope  was  suddenly  disappointed.  Already 

43 


338        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

the  liberty  of  the  press  was  suppressed,  and  with  it  all 
those  safeguards  which  it  alone  can  preserve.  It  was 
evident  that  a  religious  as  well  as  political  reaction  was 
now  to  be  inaugurated. 

Scarcely  had  the  First  Consul  returned  from  his  mem- 
orable Italian  campaign  when  he  interfered  in  affairs  of 
Church  in  the  spirit  we  have  already  indicated.  He 
was  a  novice  in  such  matters,  but  he  had  a  resolute  will, 
and  the  power  to  execute  it.  Pie  hastily  collected  a 
little  ecclesiastico-theological  library,  and  as  would  seem, 
profited  by  it  more  rapidly  still.  He  had  the  Latin 
works  of  Bossuet  translated  for  his  own  use,  and  studied 
thoroughly  the  so-called  liberties  of  the  Gallican  Church. 
The  fact  that  he  highly  approved  of  them  is  sufficient  to 
show  how  little  of  liberalism  they  really  contain.  But 
he  presumed  afterward  to  complete  them,  in  a  manner 
which  would  have  shocked  Bossuet,  and  which  sanc- 
tioned the  most  exclusive  Ultramontanism.  This  theo- 
logical apprenticeship  of  General  Bonaparte  has  been 
much  admired.  I  cannot  admire  it  any  more  highly 
than  I  can  admire  the  role  of  Constantine  at  the  Council 
of  Nice.  These  essays  at  controversy  in  the  mouths  of 
the  masters  of  the  world  make  upon  me  a  very  sad  im- 
pression. To  present  theological  arguments  when  one 
has  his  hand  on  the  sword,  is  to  go  out  of  one's  sphere. 
You  are  not  reason  but  force,  therefore  speak  not  the 
language  of  reason.  You  are  able  and  determined  to 
constrain,  do  not,  therefore,  attempt  to  persuade.  To 
every  one  his  role.  Be  a  dictator,  but,  pray,  do  not  con- 
found the  general  who  gives  orders,  with  the  Church 
father  who  cites  texts.    The  parties  are  not  equal. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  339 

The  plan  of  Bonaparte  seems  to  have  been  promptly 
conceived.  He  had  long  sought  an  occasion  to  treat 
with  the. Pope.  It  would  be  erroneous  to  suppose  that 
the  parish  bell  of  Rueil,  and  the  recollections  of  his 
childhood,  had  any  thing  to  do  in  this  matter.  His  let- 
ters at  the  time  of  the  treaty  of  Tolentino  are  full  of 
indifference  and  contempt  for  the  same  venerable  Popish 
institution  m  wThich  he  now  found  so  much  to  admire. 
In  September,  1796,  he  wrote  to  Cacault  of  "playing 
tricks  with  the  old  fox whereas  in  February,  1797,  he 
informed  the  Pope  that  his  Holiness  would  have  no 
more  faithful  ally  than  the  French  Republic,  and  on 
the  same  day  he  wrote  to  the  Directory  that  the  old 
machine  would  soon  inevitably  go  to  pieces  of  itself. 
It  was  the  profound  and  cunning  politician  that  after- 
ward found  this  machine  so  useful 

The  plan  of  the  Concordat  has  often  been  lauded  as  a 
work  of  deep  and  original  thought.  Kothing  is  more 
false.  When  closely  examined  it  reveals  little  else  than 
the  old  Gallican  tradition,  that  is  to  say,  the  entire  sub- 
ordination of  religion  to  the  civil  power.  It  was  the 
very  system  of  Louis  XIV.  as  revived  by  the  Con- 
stituent Assembly.  In  fact,  the  Concordat  was  simply 
a  sanction  of  the  Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy  minus 
its  democratic  elements,  which  were  no  longer  in  fashion. 
The  elements  which  had  displeased  at  the  Vatican  were 
now  equally  offensive  at  the  Tuileries.  A  functionary 
clergy  closely  dependent  on  the  State,  and  a  sufficient 
salary  paid  by  the  State  to  the  Bishops  and  Curates — 
such  was  the  plan  sketched  out  by  the  First  Consul ;  or 
rather,  borrowed  from  his  Gallican  library. 


340        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

The  Concordat  was  desired,  notr  by  France,  but  by- 
Bonaparte  himself.  No  current  of  opinion  urged  him 
to  the  step ;  on  the  contrary,  public  opinion  was  un- 
favorable to  an  official  worship.  But  he  arrogated  to 
himself  the  right  of  settling  a  great  question  of  con- 
science— a  most  grave  usurpation.  The  worthy  portion 
of  the  Constitutional  Clergy  asked  only,  to  be  permitted 
peacefully  and  freely  to  pursue  the  work  of  restoring 
the  Church  in  France.  The  men  of  1789,  the  true  lib- 
erals, regarded. with  marked  disfavor  the  project  of  the 
Concordat.  The  illustrious  Lafayette  made  an  attempt 
to  persuade  the  First  Consul  to  abandon  his  project  of 
creating  an  official  religion,  and  "  to  accept  in  its  "integ- 
rity the  American  principle  of  perfect  equality  among 
the  Churches,  all  remaining  independent  of  the  govern- 
ment, and  the  societies  forming  themselves  at  their 
pleasure  under  the  direction  of  the  Pastors  whom  they 
freely  chose  and  paid."  Nothing  could  better  show 
the  wide  difference  between  the  spirit  of  1789  and  that 
of  1801,  than  the  way  in  which  Bonaparte  received  this 
counsel  of  Lafayette.  Bourrienne  records  the  following 
words,  in  which  the  First  Consul  expressed  to  him  his 
impression  of  the  interview :  "  Lafayette  may  be  right  in 
theory ;  but  what  is  theory  ?  It  is  a  folly  when  applied 
to  masses  of  men ;  moreover,  he  is  always  imagining  him- 
self in  America,  as  if  the  French  were  Americans.  It 
is  not  like*ly  that  he  can  teach  me  what  is  needed  for 
this  country.  The  Catholic  religion  predominates  here, 
and  besides,  I  have  need  of  the  Pope ;  he  will  do  what 
I  shall  wish."  If  the  liberals  were  opposed  to  the 
Concordat,  the  masses  cared  little  for  it — were  en- 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  341 

tirely  indifferent.  "  At  the  accession  of  Bonaparte,* 
says  Madame  de  Stael,  "  the  most  sincere  partisans  of 
Catholicism,  after  their  long  sufferings  from  political  in- 
quisition, aspired  only  after  complete  religious  liberty. 
The  general  wish  of  the  nation  was,  that  persecution 
against  the  priests  should  cease,  that  no  oath  should  be 
exacted  of  them,  and  finally,  that  the  government  should 
in  no  way  meddle  with  private  opinion  or  public  wor- 
ship. Hence,  the  Consular  government  would  have 
satisfied  the  public  by  granting  toleration  as  it  exists  in 
America.  But  the  First  Consul  knew  that  by  giving  to 
the  Church  a  political  character,  its  influence  would 
second  the  interests  of  despotism.  What  he  desired 
was  to  prepare  his  way  to  the  throne.  He  needed  a 
clergy  as  he  needed  chamberlains." 

To  those  who  advised  him  to  treat  all  religions  alike, 
he  replied,  that  in  a  religious  country  the  government 
could  not  be  indifferent.  But  what  a  sad  doctrine  is 
this,  that  the  State  should  interfere  in  deciding  religious 
disputes !  History  gives  no  more  certain  lesson  than 
that  the  way  to  prolong  for  ever  theological  strifes  is 
for  the  State  authoritatively  to  decide  them.  And  in 
fact  it  would  have  been  quite  unworthy  the  great  war- 
rior to  renew  the  tragi-comedy  of  Byzantine  history. 
His  ambition  was  not  so  low.  He  cared  very  little 
about  these  disputes  of  religion.  He  himself  explained 
his  real  motives  :  "  There  has  never  been  a  State,"  said 
he,  "without  religion,  without  worship,  without  priests. 
Is  it  not  better  to  organize  the  worship  and  discipline 
the  priests,  than  to  have  matters  as  they  are  ?  Instead 
of  banishing  the  prh-<t*  who  oppose  the  government,  is 


34:2        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror, 

it  not  better  to  win  them  over?  I  tell  you  that  the 
priests  who  accept  office  will  break  connection  with  the 
former  incumbents,  and  be  interested  in  preventing 
their  return."  When  urged  to  put  himself  at  the  head 
of  the  clergy,  and  by  a  single  word  make  France  Prot- 
estant, he  replied,  "  Should  I  not  on  the  contrary  do  the 
very  opposite  of  Henry  VIII.  ?  You  do  not  under- 
stand the  matter ;  the  half  of  France  would  remain 
Catholic.  We  would  have  interminable  quarrels."  His 
continual  answer  to  all  opposers  was,  "  I  need  a  Pope,  a 
Pope  who  will  conciliate  and  not  divide,  who  will  unite 
the  people,  and  give  them  to  the  government.  And  for 
this  I  need  the  real  Roman  Catholic  Pope."  I  need  a 
Pope.  Such  was  the  cherished  thought  of  the  First 
Consul.  He  needed  a  Pope  on  the  earth  as  he  needed  a 
God  in  the  heavens — a  religion  which  would  crown  his 
power,  impress  on  the  people  wholesome  notions  of 
authority,  and  enable  him  to  keep  up  his  police  at  less 
expense,  and  to  collect  his  taxes  with  less  difficulty! 
When  it  was  suggested  that  the  Roman  clergy  might 
be  too  much  under  the  influence  of  the  Pope,  he  replied, 
"With  the  armies  and  the  good  wishes  of  France  I 
shall  always  sufficiently  be  the  master.  If  I  shall  re- 
store the  altars,  if  I  shall  protect  the  priests,  if  I  shall 
feed  them,  and  treat  them  as  the  ministers  of  religion 
deserve  to  be  treated  in  every  country,  they  will  do 
what  I  shall  require  of  them  in  the  interest  of  the 
public  repose.  They  will  calm  the  people,  unite  them 
under  their  authority,  and  place  them  under  my  hand." 
To  feed  the  priests,  and  in  exchange  therefor  to  have 
them  put  into  the  hands  of  the  civil  power  by  the  Pope — 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  343 

this  was  what  the  First  Consul  called  restoring  religion*. 
The  clergy  are  to  kiss  the  hand  which  feeds  them! 

Bonaparte  did  not  presume  to  hold  such  soldier  lan- 
guage to  Gregory.  He  condescended  so  far  as  to  ask 
of  him  a  report  on  religious  affairs,  though  he  was 
fully  decided  to  make  no  account  of  it.  ,  We  may  judge 
of  his  sincerity  by  an  expression  which  he  made  at 
the  very  time  of  the  negotiations  with  Rome.  "  What 
we  are  doing,"  said  he  to  a  councilor  of  State,  "will 
strike  a  mortal  blow  at  the  Papacy."  He  was,  there- 
fore, befooling  the  Pope ;  he  was  doing  as  he  had 
some  years  previously  advised  the  French  minister  at 
Rome  to  do :  he  was  "  playing  tricks  with  the  old 
fox."  Such  were  the  edifying  preliminaries  of  this 
religious  peace,  whose  not  less  edifying  meanderings 
remain  to  be  traced. 

But  all  the  French  nation  could  not  have  the  ad- 
vantage of  being  directly  persuaded  by  the  forcible 
and  original  eloquence  of  the  First  Consul.  It  was 
therefore  to  be  feared  that  public  opinion  might  pro- 
nounce itself  against  him,  unless  it  were  carefully 
watched  and  controlled.  The  liberty  of  the  press  was 
consequently  suspended,  and  it  was  easy  to  forbid  all 
free  discussion  of  religious  questions.  The  word  of 
order  was  given  to  the  Prefects.  A  circular  of  one  of 
these  officers  to  the  Journalists  deserves  to  be  placed 
among  the  annals  of  administrative  curiosities.  "  The 
interests  of  earth,"  so  wrote  this  functionary,  "suffice 
for  the  aliment  of  your  journals ;  prove  your  resj>ect 
for  those  of  heaven  by  abstaining  from  discussing 
them."    In  conclusion,  he  menaced  immediate  Buspen- 


344        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

sion  against  all  journals  which  did  not  keep  silence  on 
religious  questions.  The  moment  for  State  communi- 
cations to  the  official  bodies  had  not  yet  arrived.  It 
was  in  secrecy  and  silence  that  the  so-called  religious 
peace  was  preparing.  Silentium  faciunt  et  pacem 
appellant. 


Religion  anti  the  Reign  of  Te?Tor.  345 


CHAPTER  n. 

.     CONCLUSION  OF  THE  CONCORDAT. 

We  already  know  the  basis  of  the  negotiation  —  the 
Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy  slightly  amended. 
The  dioceses  were  to  be  reduced  so  as  to  correspond  to 
the  number  of  the  Departments,  each  Prefect  having  a 
Bishop  within  his  jurisdiction.  The  ancient  Concor- 
dats were  revived,  giving  the  right  of  nominating  the 
Bishops  to  the  Prince,  and  that  of  confirming  them  to 
the  Pope.  The  Pope  was  easily  induced  to  change  the 
bounds  of  the  diocese,  for  thereby  he  was.  a  great  gainer, 
and  received  what  he  never  before  had  succeeded  in 
obtaining :  it  placed  the  episcopacy  in  entire  depend- 
ence upon  him,  and  realized  what  Ultramontanisni  had 
not  even  dreamed  of.  But  there  were  two  concessions 
demanded  of  the  Pope  which  met  with  strong  resistance. 
To  the  honor  of  the  First  Consul,  let  us  admit  that  he 
firmly  desired  the  equality  before  the  law  of  all  religious 
beliefs.  He  opposed  a  return  to  an  exclusive  and  per- 
secuting Church..  Besides,  such  a  reaction  was  no  longer 
possible,  even  in  enslaved  France.  But  the  Papacy  held 
as  a  primary  truth  that  Catholicism  alone  should  be 
tolerated  and  protected.  Such  was  then,  is  now,  and 
will  ever  be,  the  doctrine  of  that  Church  so  long  as  it 
retains  a  theocratic  government.    On  this  point  it  long 

resisted.    The  other  point  demanded  of  the  Pope,  and 

44 


346        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

which  was  not  less  bitter,  was  to'  confirm  the  nomina- 
tions of  Bishops  who  had  belonged  to  the  Constitutional 
Clergy,  against  whom  the  Church  had  exhausted  her 
thunders.  This  would  amount  to  a  humiliating  retrac- 
tion. The  Papacy  never  granted  it  frankly.  Her  re- 
sistance was  long  and  obstinate.  But  the  First  Consul 
would  not  yield. 

The  occupant  of  the  Papal  chair  at  this  time, 
Pius  VII.,*  was  of  a  very  respectable  character,  with- 
out arrogance,  but  possessing  that  gentle  firmness  which 
at  times  becomes  invincible.  His  reputation  was  with- 
out spot ;  he  had  formed  himself  in  the  shadow  of  the 
cloister,  and  had  deservedly  obtained  the  highest  post 
in  the  Church.  His  fine,  regular  features  bore  the  im- 
press of  a  pure  and  melancholy  spirit.  He  could  have 
well  personated  a  persecuted  Church,  and  become  one 
of  those  living  protestations  which  are  so  dangerous  to 
despotism :  it  would  have  been  dangerous  to  make  a 
martyr  of  such  a  man.  His  head  seemed  crowned  in 
advance  with  a  nascent  aureola  ;  but  this  did  not  hinder 
him  from  possessing  a  good  degree  of  Italian  finesse. 
General  Bonaparte  had  inspired  him  with  warm  sympa- 
thies, which  the  worst  of  treatment  never  wholly 
quenched.  As  Bishop  of  Imola  he  had  published,  at  the 
time  of  the  French  invasion,  a  sermon  full  of  republican 
sentiments.  It  was  a  rare  good  fortune  for  the  First 
Consul  that  the  choice  of  the  conclave  of  Cardinals 
which  was  assembled  at  Venice  to  elect  a  successor  to 
Pius  VI.  fell  upon  Cardinal  Chiaramonti.  The  Prelate 
who  had  been  most  active  in  bringing  about  this  choice 
*  See  Appendix,  note  43. 


Itdigloti  and  the  Reign  of  Tcrrw.  347 


was  the  eloquent  and  shrewd  Consalvi.  He  had  been 
rewarded.  At  the  opening  of  the  transactions  with 
Bonaparte  he  was  Secretary  of  the  Papal  State.  He 
was  ardently  attached  to  the  interests  of  Pius  VII. 
The  Papal  embassador  to  France  was  Spina,  Bishop  of 
Genoa,  a  cunning,  timid  priest,  deeply  interested  in 
preserving  the  temporal  power  of  the  Pope.  This  man 
was  to  treat  at  Paris  with  Talleyrand,  the  married  ex- 
Prelate,  and  with  Abbot  Bernier,  once  the  head  of  the 
revolt  in  La  Vendee,  now  a  very  warm  partisan  of 
Bonaparte.  The  First  Consul's  envoy  at  Rome  was 
Cacault,  a  disabused  revolutionist,  who  knew  perfectly 
the  Papal  Court,  and  who  was  almost  an  Italian  in  cun- 
ning. He  was  well  fitted  for  the  difficult  role  of  media- 
ting between  the  warm  impatience  of  Bonaparte  and  the 
vexatious  slowness  of  the  Holy  See. 

Abbot  Bernier  opened  the  negotiation  by  communi- 
cating to  Bishop  Spina  the  plan  of  Bonaparte,  which, 
besides  '  the  articles  already  mentioned,  required  the 
Pope  to  renounce  his  claim  on  the  confiscated  Church 
property.  This  and  the  two  other  points  previously 
noticed,  were  persistently  opposed  by  Spina.  Weary  of 
these  delays,  the  First  Consul  sent  his  plan  directly  to 
Rome.  He  received  in  answer  a  direct  refusal  of  the 
points  of  concession  on  which  he  insisted.  He  became 
in  consequence  violently  irritated.  He  directed  Cacault, 
his  envoy  at  Rome,  to  demand  of  the  Pope  the  ratifica- 
tion of  his  plan  within  three  days,  and  in  case  of  refusal, 
he  was  directed  to  leave  Rome  and  retire  to  Florence. 
Cacault,  who  was  a  cool,  prudent  man,  and  earnestly 
desirous  of  reconciling  the  parties,  was  deeply  perplexed 


348        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

at  this  harsh  dispatch.  He  knew  that  the  friendship  of 
the  Church  was  of  immense  interest  to  Bonaparte.  The 
brief  time  of  three  days  having  elapsed,  he  persuaded 
Pius  VII.  to  send  to  Paris,  with  conciliatory  proposals, 
Cardinal  Consalvi,  and  leaving  at  Rome  his  private 
secretary,  so  as  to  keep  up  the  negotiation,  betook  him- 
self to  Florence.  The  sequel  proved  that  his  counsel  to 
the  Pope  was  very  prudent.  The  timid  Consalvi  had  a 
great  dread  of  passing  the  Alps.  He  felt  as  if  he  were 
passing  into  a  land  of  barbarians.  But  his  surprise  was 
very  great  when  he  found  himself  warmly  welcomed 
into  a  brilliant  capital  where  the  services  of  religion 
were  in  open  practice.  His  spirits  revived.  His  first 
interview  with  the  First  Consul  was  opened  under  the 
lowering  frowns  o£  the  latter ;  but  these  marks  of  dis- 
pleasure gave  place  before  its  close  to  that  fine  smile  of 
satisfaction  which  was  one  of  the  warrior's  greatest 
seductions. 

The  menaces  of  rupture  being  thus  followed  by  a 
more  conciliatory  spirit,  contributed  greatly  to  incline 
Rome  to  the  side  of  concession.  Foreign  agents,  how- 
ever, did  all  they  could  to  counteract  this  tendency. 
Both  in  society  and  among  the  people  the  following 
biting  satire  was  constantly  repeated : 

Pio  (VI.)  per  conservar  la  fede 

Perde  la  sede ; 
Pio  (VII.)  per  conservar  la  sede 

Perde  la  fede. 

Attempts  were  made  to  strengthen  the  yielding  spirit 
of  the  Pope  by  showing  him  falsified  proclamations 
of  Bonaparte  while  in  Egypt,  wherein  he  boasted  of 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  349 


having  destroyed  the  Holy  See.  But  surely  his  authentic 
ones  were  heterodox  enough  to  inspire  fear.  But  coun- 
sels favorable  to  the  French  prevailed.  The  motives, 
however,  which  led  to  the  necessary  concessions  were 
not  of  a  very  high  order.  The  Pope  was  led  to  hope  that 
Bonaparte  would  give  him  a  larger  temporal  domain ; 
moreover,  as  before  has  been  stated,  the  proposed  Con- 
cordat gave  him  an  authority  over  the  Bishops  which 
the  Papacy  never  before  possessed.  Such  were  the 
motives  of  the  contracting  parties. 

The  Concordat  was  signed  July  15,  1801,  by  Cardinal 
Consalvi  and  Joseph  Bonaparte,  whom  his  brother  had 
charged  with  that  duty.  Some  of  its  language  is  as 
follows  :  "  The  government  of  the  Republic  recognizes 
that  the  Apostolical  Roman  Catholic  religion  is  the  re- 
ligion of  the  great  majority  of  the  French.  His  Holi- 
ness recognizes  likewise  that  this  same  Church  has  re- 
ceived, and  expects  yet  at  this  time  the  greatest  good 
and  glory  from  its  establishment  in  France,  and  from 
the  personal  professions  of  the  same  by  the  First  Consul 
of  the  Republic.  Consequently,  after  this  mutual  ac- 
knowledgment, they  have  agreed,  as  well  for  the  good 
of  religion,  as  for  the  maintenance  of  internal  tranquil- 
lity, upon  what  follows,  namely :  The  Apostolical  Ro- 
man Catholic  religion  shall  be  freely  exercised  in  France. 
Its  worship  shall  be  public,  and  in  conformity  with  the 
police  regulations  which  the  government  shall  judge 
necessary  for  the  public  peace.  The  First  Consul  of 
the  Republic  shall,  within  three  months  after  the  publi- 
cation of  the  bull  of  his  Holiness,  make  nominations  to 
the-  newly-circumscribed  archbishoprics  and  bishoprics. 


350        Religion  and  the  Eeign  of  Terror. 

His  Holiness  shall  confer  on  them  canonical  investiture 
according  to  the  forms  used  for  France  before  the 
change  of  the  government."  In  other  parts  of  the  Con- 
cordat it  was  provided,  among  other  things,  that  the 
Bishops  might  appoint  to  the  curacies,  though  their 
choice  was  to  be  limited  to  persons  acceptable  to  the 
government ;  that  the  Pope  should  in  no  way  trouble 
those  who  had  obtained  confiscated  Church  property, 
and  that  a  new  Concordat  would  be  necessary  in  case 
any  of  the  successors  of  the  First  Consul  should  be 
Protestant. 

The  essential  articles  of  this  Concordat  were  simply  a 
revival  of  the  ancient  treaties  between  the  Popes  and 
the  rulers  of  France.  The  contracting  parties,  however 
soon  found  in  it  occasion  for  bitter  contention.  As  to 
•the  Church,  it  was  completely  enslaved  to  the  two 
powers,  the  civil  and  the*  Papal.  The  civil  power  was 
master  of  a  functionary  clergy,  and  could  use  against  all 
the  displeasing  efforts  of  the  Pope  the  clause  which  sub- 
jected the  worship  to  regulations  of  police.  As  to  the 
Pope,  he  still  possessed,  as  in  ancient  times,  the  impor- 
tant power  of  refusing  his  bulls.  The  result  showed  of 
how  little  value  is  a  religious  peace  which  is  imposed  by 
authority. 

However  powerful  were  the  two  contractors,  the  one 
politically,  the  other  ecclesiastically,  they  found  much 
difficulty  in  putting  their  treaty  into  effect.  The  Pope 
was  slow  and  hesitating.  The  first  work  of  Bonaparte 
was  to  cause  the  Concordat  to  be  accepted  by  the 
Legislature  as  a  treaty  with  a  foreign  power.  But  in 
this  he  met  with  decided  opposition.    Even  the  Council 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  351 

of  State,  to  whom  it  was  presented  August  6,  1801, 
received  it  coldly,  and  in  silence.    A  second  embarrass- 
ment arose  from  the  Council  of  the  Constitutional 
Clergy,  which  was  just  then  in  session  in  Paris.    It  was 
necessary  to  silence  and  dissolve  this  body  in  order  to 
be  able  to  say  that  before  the  Concordat  religion  was  in 
the  lowest  decline,  and  anxiously  awaiting  the  salutary 
appearance  of  the  new  Cyrus.    The  Council  was  dis- 
solved on  the  16th  of  August,  before  the  Concordat  was 
made  public.    The  opposition  of  the  Legislative  corps, 
which  had  not  the  power  of  debating,  but  only  that  of 
voting,  was  very  marked.    It  showed  its  displeasure  at 
the  Concordat  by  calling  to  the  chair  the  infidel  Dupuis. 
Moreover,  the  French  generals  made  the  Concordat  the 
subject  of  open  ridicule.    The  result  of  this  opposition 
is  well  known.    It  was  necessary  to  resort  to  a  second 
coup  d'etat.    Advantage  was  taken  of  an  ambiguity  of 
the  Constitution  to  renew,  out  of  such  material  as  should 
please  the  Executive,  the  Legislative  corps  and  the 
Tribunate.    The  subservient  Legislature  thus  obtained 
ratified  the  Concordat  without  difficulty. 

As  to  the  Pope,  besides  his  scruples,  he  met  with 
more  than  one  annoying  obstacle.  The  ancient  Bishops, 
who  had  fled  to  England  and  Germany,  sent  to  him 
earnest  protests  against  being  deposed  from  dioceses 
which  "  had  been  confided  to  their  care  by  the  provi- 
dence of  the  most  high  God."  In  the  end,  however,  he 
disregarded  their  protests,  and  himself  also  committed  a 
coup  d'etat  in  accepting  a  Concordat  which,  though  in 
some  respects  disagreeable,  greatly  increased  his  power 
over  the  clergy. 


352        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

It  remained  now  only  to  have  the  Concordat  ratified, 
and  to  put  it  into  operation.  At  -this  point  a  grave 
measure,  emanating  from  the  First  Consul,  was  taken, 
which  showed  how  precarious  was  this  so-called  peace 
between  Church  and  State.  In  fact,  the  Concordat  was 
hardly  concluded  when  it  was  set  aside  by  one  of  the 
contracting  parties — the  one  which  had  the  power. 

The  organic  articles  which  were  presented  to  the 
Legislature  at  the  same  time  with  the  Concordat,  tended 
to  the  complete  enslavement  of  the  Church  to  the  civil 
power.  These  Articles  constitute  a  most  perfect  system 
of  despotic  centralization,  as  applied  to  the  Churches  to 
which  the  nation  gave  tolerance.  A  brief  analysis  of 
their  scope  will  be  of  interest,  as  it  will  show  what  was 
understood  by  religious  liberty  by  the  French  authori- 
ties in  1802. 

At  first  glance  these  laws  seem  nothing  more  than  a 
reproduction  of  the  rules  which  regulated  the  relations 
of  Church  and  State  under  the  ancient  regime.  They 
do  not  surpass  the  extent  of  authority  which  Louis  XIV. 
had  claimed.  But  we  must  not  forget,  that  whereas 
formerly  the  Church  derived  very  great  power,  and 
even  a  sort  of  independence,  from  her  vast  and  untax- 
able landed  property,  she  was  now  reduced  to  a  state  of 
utter  poverty  and  abject  dependence.  One  of  the  good 
features  of  these  laws  was,  the  emphatic  tolerance  which 
they  gave  to  dissenters  from  Catholicism.  Protestants 
were  put  on  legal  equality  with  Catholics.  Respect  for 
the  religious  minority  was  pushed  so  far  as  to  forbid,  in 
all  towns  where  as  ingle  Protestant  temple  existed,  the 
parading  of  the  pompous  Catholic  ceremonies  outside  of 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  353 

the  church  inclosurcs.    In  this  respect  the  First  Consul 
showed  himself  the  true  heir  of  the  French  Revolution. 
But  this  and  a  few  other  provisions  aside,  the  Organic 
laws  formed  simply  a  net-work  of  administrative  despot- 
ism.   All  direct  correspondence  with  the  head  of  the 
Church  was  cut  off.    The  Holy  Father  could  not  ad- 
dress a  single  word  to  the  French  Bishops  without  get- 
ting it  first  countersigned  by  the  government  at  Paris. 
His  Legates  had  to  obtain  from  the  same  source  a  special 
approval.    Xo  decree  of  a  Council  could  be  executed 
without  first  obtaining  a  civil  sanction.    The  govern- 
ment assumed  the  right  of  forbidding  whatever  it  should 
judge  not  to  be  good  for  the  public  tranquillity,  a  vague 
expression,  which  could  be  extended  even  to  doctrinal 
decisions,  since  they  might  occasion  controversial  a<nta- 
tion.    >s  o  national  or  diocesan  convention,  or  other  de- 
liberative body  of  the  clergy,  could  be  held  without 
special  authorization.    Even  a  private  chapel  could  not 
be  opened  without  governmental  license.     The  right 
of  freely  going  and  coming,  so  dear  to  the  French,  was 
refused  to  the  Bishops.     They  were  not  allowed  to 
leave  their  dioceses  without  special  permission.  The 
government,  full  of  paternal  interest  in  providin  H  for 
the  service  of  the  altars,  required  a  list  of  all  the  stu- 
dents of  theology,  and  prescribed  that  early  in  their 
studies  they  should  be  thoroughly  instructed  in  the 
principles  of  Gallicanism  as  opposed  to  Ultra montanism. 
Even  the  costume  of  the  priests  was  regulated  by  law. 
They  were  required  to  dress  in  black,  and  in  the 
"  French  style."    To  all  these  laws  were  afiixed  suitable 
penal  sanctions. 

45 


354        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

Such  was  the  liberty  of  the  Church  as  restored  by 
Bonaparte.  A  clergy  cut  off  from  their  spiritual  head, 
forbidden  free  deliberation,  curbed  in  their  missionary 
activity,  trained  under  the  jealous  eye  of  the  govern- 
ment, nominated  and  incessantly  watched  over  by  the 
same,  preaching  only  what  shall  please  the  same,  de- 
pending absolutely  on  the  hand  which  feeds  them, — such 
is  the  Catholic  Church  of  the  organic  laws.  Now,  all 
these  infractions  of  religious  liberty  were  ostensibly  only 
so  many  precautions  against  a  foreign  potentate.  And 
so  long  as  the  head  of  Catholicism  shall  be  a  temporal 
prince,  governments  will  have  a  pretext  for  such  infrac- 
tions of  religious  liberty.  The  Pope,  as  a  temporal  ruler, 
will  always  have  interests  which  conflict  with  those  of 
this  or  that  other  power.  Catholics  will,  therefore,  be 
constantly  exposed  to  violations  of  their  liberty  so  long 
as  the  temporal  power  of  the  Papacy  exists. 

But  the  Organic  laws  were  much  more  than  precau- 
tions against  the  domination  of  a  foreign  power.  They 
enslaved  religion  itself  without  cause.  This  is  clearly 
seen  in  the  fact  that  they  oppressed  Protestantism  as 
much  as  they  oppressed  Popery.  Protestantism,  also, 
could  not  extend  itself,  or  make  doctrinal  decisions, 
without  the  approval  of  the  government.  No  mention 
at  all  is  made  in  the  Organic  laws  of  Churches  which 
might  choose  to  remain  free,  and  not  receive  salaries  from 
the  State.  Protestantism,  moreover,  seemed  glad  enough 
to  fall  into  the  arms  of  the  State,  and  enjoy  even 
a  restricted  liberty,  the  liberty  of  a  public  legal  ex- 
istence. France,  wearied  of  anarchy,  seemed  to  be 
satisfied  to  receive  a  servitude  gilded  with  glory  m 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  355 

lieu  of  that  liberty  for  which  she  had  so  long  fought 
in  vain. 

The  Concordat  and  the  organic  laws  were  presented  to 
the  Legislature  in  April,  1 802.  The  tribune  who  defended 
them  most  ably  was  Portalis.  His  polished  discourse 
was  but  a  digest  of  the  views  of  the  First  Consul.  He 
presented,  at  some  length,  the  necessity  of  a  religion  of 
some  kind,  and  the  excellence  of  Christianity  in  particu- 
lar, as  a  means  of  inculcating  in  the  public  a  spirit  of 
obedience.  His  whole  speech,  however,  turned  on  this 
point  of  utility  for  the  public  peace.  He  forgot  that  it 
is  first,  and  above  all,  obedience  to  God  that  Christianity 
teaches,  and  that  for  this  very  reason  it  is  of  all  relig- 
ions the  most  hostile  to  despotism.  But  there  was  little 
necessity  of  persuasion.  The  purged  and  subservient 
Legislature  were  willing  to  vote  whatever  was  required 
of  them  by  their  master. 

At  Easter,  April  18,  1802,  the  Concordat  was  pub- 
lished, and  a  solemn  Te  Deum  chanted  with  great  pomp 
in  Notre  Dame  in  honor  of  peace  and  the  re-establish- 
ment of  worship.  Immense  multitudes  surrounded  the 
Church  and  filled  the  streets.  Acclamations  were 
showered  upon  the  Great  Consul,  as  he  was  termed. 
Long  lines  of  carriages,  filled  with  the  fair  ladies  of  the 
official  circles,  followed  the  chariot  of  the  First  Consul 
and  the  Papal  Legate.  But  the  affair  was  very  displeas- 
ing to  many  of  the  generals.  Moreau,  Lannes,  Auge- 
reau,  Oudinot,  and  others  openly  expressed  their  repug- 
nance, and  it  required  all  the  authority  of  Bonaparte  to 
induce  some  of  them  to  remain  in  the  carriages  when 
they  learned  that  they  were  to  go  to  mass.    Many  who 


356        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror, 

were  present  indulged  either  in  ridicule  or  grief.  The 
ceremony  was  cold  and  stately.  The  whole  affair  was 
but  a  solemn  mockery,  for  the  element  of  faith  was  en- 
tirely lacking  in  the  chief  actors.  The  attitude  of  the 
First  Consul  was  calm,  grave,  and  majestic,  much  as  if 
he  felt  that  in  restoring  religion  he  was  performing  an 
act  of  signal  condescension,  and  rendering  quite  an 
honor  to  God.  He  forgot  that  it  is  not  proudly  upright 
and  in  the  attitude  of  a  great  chieftain,  but  rather  on 
one's  knees  and  with  heart  conviction,  that  the  interests 
of  religion  are  advanced.  Such  official  services  are  a 
great  profanation  of  the  temple  of  God.  On  his  return 
from  Notre  Dame,  and  after  the  banquet  which  cele- 
brated the  peace  of  consciences,  the  First  Consul,  highly 
satisfied  with  the  success  of  his  Concordat,  asked  some 
of  his  generals  their  opinion  of  the  ceremony.  "  Did  it 
not  to-day  seem,"  exclaimed  he,  "  that  every  thing  was 
re-established  in  its  ancient  order  ?  "  "  It  was  a  fine  piece 
of  mummery,"  answered  Delmas  ;  "  nothing  was  lacking 
but  the  two  millions  of  Frenchmen  who  have  died  for 
liberty,  which  is  now  also  dead." 

With  reference  to  this  affair  Bishop  Gregory  remarks : 
"The  Concordat,  a  work  of  iniquity  like  that  of  1516, 
was  proclaimed  in  the  Cathedral  of  Paris.  Archbishop 
Boisgelin  preached  a  sermon,  in  which  he  stated  that 
religion,  which  had  left  France  with  the  emigrating 
clergy,  had  also  returned  with  them.  This  falsehood 
shocked  the  two  classes  of  the  clergy  who  had  remained 
in  France  true  to  their  duties  through  all  the  storms  of 
revolution.  The  Concordat  was  celebrated  in  prose  and 
verse  by  all  the  flatterers,  and  by  all  who  were  ambitious 


RsUgion  anS  the  Reign  of  Terror.  357 

of  the  favors  of  the  government.  There  was  no  end  to 
the  laudation  of  him  who  had  raised  up  the  altars  ;  he 
was  called  the  envoy  of  the  Most  High,  the  man  of 
right,  the  Cyrus,  the  Constantine,  the  Charlemagne,  of 
modern  times."  These  words  of  this  faithful  Catholic 
Bishop  are  very  significant. 

But  the  illusion  that  Bonaparte  had  been  actuated  by 
respect  for  religion  in  itself,  could  not  be  long  enter- 
tertained.  It  was  in  vain  that  he  said  to  the  Protestant 
clergy,  that  he  would  permit  whoever  of  his  successors 
in  any  way  violated  the  liberty  of  worship  to  be  treated 
as  a  Nero.  His  real  motive  was  but  too  clearly  revealed 
in  the  proclamation  which  accompanied  the  publication 
of  the  Concordat.  "  Ministers  of  a  religion  of  peace," 
said  he,  "  let  the  most  profound  forgetfulness  cover  your 
dissensions,  misfortunes,  and  faults.  Let  that  religion 
which  unites  you  together,  attach  you  indissolubly  to 
the  interests  of  your  country.  Use  for  your  country  all 
the  influence  which  your  ministry  gives  you  over  the 
people.  Inspire  the  young  citizens  with  a  love  for  our 
institutions,  and  a  respect  for  the  authorities  which  have 
been  created  to  protect  them.  Let  them  learn  of  you 
that  the  God  of  .peace  is  the  God  of  armies,  and  that  he 
fights  with  those  who  defend  the  independence  and  lib- 
erty of  France,"  The  meaning  of  this  is  only  too  clear. 
Not  content  with  placing  religion  under  the  hand  of  his 
government,  he  wished  to  put  God  under  his  banner 
also,  and  make  him  march  with  the  French  eagles.  He 
desired  to  have  a  French,  or  rather,  a  Napoleonic  god, 
whose  ministers  would  docilely  second  his  political 
ambition. 


358        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

Vast  numbers  of  Catholics  had  little  confidence  in, 
and  still  less  enthusiasm  for,  the  ecclesiastical  measures  of 
the  First  Consul.  They  were  perfectly  convinced  that 
they  did  not  spring  from  a  respect  for  religion.  It  was 
futile  and  vain  to  attempt  to  deceive  the  people,  and 
to  reduce  religion  to  a  mere  instrument  of  domination ; 
she  will  not  act  such  a  dishonorable  role.  She  will 
contribute  to  public  peace,  only  when  she  is  loved  for 
her  own  sake,  and  when  she  is  sufficiently  respected  to 
be  herself  served  instead  of  being  used  as  a  mere  instru- 
ment for  other  interests. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 


359 


CHAPTER  in. 

EFFECTS  OF  THE  CONCORDAT  CONCLUSION. 

We  shall  speak  of  events  which  took  place  after  the 
conclusion  of  the  Concordat  only  so  far  as  they  illus- 
trate its  true  bearing.  But  it  is  of  importance  to  show 
that  this  mischievous  treaty,  which  was  ostensibly  de- 
signed to  procure  the  peace  of  consciences,  perpetuated 
in  France  on  the  contrary  a  most  shameful  violation  of 
conscience,  and  excited  between  the  two  contracting 
parties  difficulties  which  deeply  agitated  the  Church. 

We  have  seen  that  the  Concordat  made  no  provision 
for  any  Church  which  would  not  consent  to  a  union 
with  the  State.  The  first  effect  of  this  treaty  was,  a 
more  complete  suppression  of  the  liberty  of  worship 
than  had  taken  place  in  the  darkest  period  of  the  Reign 
of  Terror.  I  know  that  religious  liberty  was  at  this 
time  poorly  represented,  namely,  by  the  Theophilan- 
thropists.  This  sect  still  numbered  a  few  societies 
which  were  not  willing  to  be  connected  with  the  State, 
and  which  desired  simply  the  liberty  of  worshiping  ac- 
cording to  their  convictions.  This  worship,  however 
objectionable  from  a  theological  stand-point,  was  entirely 
moral,  and,  therefore,  should  have  escaped  the  oppres- 
sion of  the  government.  The  Theophilanthropists  were 
perfectly  justifiable  in  claiming  the  liberty  of  worship. 
From  this  moment  the  ridiculous  features  of  their  fond* 


300        Religion,  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

mental  theories  disappeared,  and  the  only  point  in  ques- 
tion was,  whether  they  should  be  allowed  the  enjoyment 
of  one  of  the  most  sacred  rights  of  man.  The  leaders  of 
the  sect,  after  being  turned  out  of  the  national  churches, 
applied  in  vain  to  the  government  for  permission  to 
celebrate  their  worship  in  a  house  rented  by  themselves. 
All  their  protests  in  the  name  of  liberty  of  conscience 
were  fruitless.  Most  justly  they  exclaimed,  "  What  has 
become  of  the  liberty  of  worship,  if  it  is  permitted  only 
to  follow  one  of  the  State  religions  ?  "  But  this  was  the 
will  of  the  authorities.  "  I  do  not  wish  a  dominant  re- 
ligion," said  Bonaparte  to  his  Council,  "  nor  do  I  icish 
that  new  ones  should  be  established.  The  Catholics,  the 
Reformed  and  the  Lutheran  Churches,  which  the  Con- 
cordat recognizes,  are  religions  enough."  At  the  con- 
elusion  of  one  of  his  ill-humored  speeches  to  the  Council 
of  State,  he  said  abruptly,  "  Make  a  decree  closing  the 
Theophilanthropist  worship."  This  same  hostility  to 
the  liberty  of  worship  is  revealed,  besides,  in  the  harsh 
manner  in  which  he  treated  the  persistent  applications 
of  the  Jews  for  the  rights  of  conscience.  "  For  the 
Jews,"  said  he,  "  we  must  have  laws  of  exception" 
And  the  Jews  escaped  these  oppressive  laws  of  excep- 
tion only  by  finally  consenting  to  become  a  State  relig- 
ion— to  be  salaried  by  the  State,  and  subjected  to  the 
surveillance  and  regulating  intervention  of  the  same. 

As  to  the  effect  of  Xapoleon's  salarying  the  Protest- 
ant Churches,  we  are  of  opinion  that  it  was  decidedly 
pernicious.  They  had  the  same  protection  as  the  Cath- 
olics, but  were  also  subjected  to  the  same  servitude. 
An  account  of  the  condition  of  the  Protestant  Churches, 


Iidlfjlon  and  the  Reign  of  Terror,  361 

published  by  Rabaut  the  Younger  in  1807,  shows  that 
in  the  majority  of  them  worship  had  been  continued 
even  during  the  fever  heat  of  the  Revolution.  And  the 
simple  enjoyment  of  liberty  according  to  the  principles 
of  1789,  would  have  sufficed  to  put  them  into  a  flourish- 
ing condition  without  any  pecuniary  aid  from  the  State. 
But  the  Protestants  did  not  feel  at  first  all  the  cramping 
effects  of  the  Organic  laws  of  1802.  Happy  in  the  modi- 
cum of  privilege  they  enjoyed,  they  did  not  go  even  to 
the  end  of  their  chain.  They  were  glad  of  the  honor 
of  possessing  temples  in  the  presence  of  the  Catholic 
Churches.  But  less  honor  and  more  liberty  would  have 
been  preferable.  The  Organic  laws,  however,  were 
finally  deeply  felt.  Protestantism  was,  as  it  were,  de- 
capitated in  its  interior  organization  by  the  privation  of 
those  large  deliberative  assemblies  which  had  contrib- 
uted so  much  to  its  glory  in  the  past.  This  was  an 
injury  which  all  the  persecutions  of  the  Catholics  had 
never  succeeded  in  inflicting,  for  the  Churches  of  the 
desert  had  never  given  up  their  synodal  organization. 
The  laws  of  Napoleon  admitted  that  the  Protestants 
might  hold  synods ;  but  as  the  government  reserved  to 
itself  the  organizing  of  them,  it  was  but  a  chimerical 
promise  whose  realization  is  yet  awaited  after  a  lapse  of 
sixty  years.  The  First  Consul  was  no  friend  of  delib- 
erative assemblies ;  he  never  convoked  them  of  any 
class  whatever,  except  when  he  wished  to  obtain  of 
them  some  signal  act  of  collective  cowardice.  For  this 
purpose  the  Legislative  corps  was  an  excellent  tool ; 
but  the  trial  which  he  made  of  a  Church  Council  in 

1811  turned  out  too  unfavorably  to  tempt  him  to  con- 

46 


362        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

voke  a  synod.  Notwithstanding  all  this,  however,  the 
Protestants  remained  sincerely  attached  to  him.  They 
showed  him  more  thanks  than  were  deserved,  for  more 
than  once  he  made  nse  of  their  Churches  as  a  bugbear 
for  frightening  the  Pope.  In  a  letter  to  Pius  VIA., 
dated  January  7,  1806,  Napoleon  enumerates  his  griev- 
ances against  the  Court  of  Rome.  The  letter  contains 
these  significant  words  :  "  I  have  experienced  on  the 
part  of  your  Holiness  only  refusals  on  all  subjects,  even 
on  those  which  were  of  the  highest  importance  to  the 
cause  of  religion ;  as,  for  example,  when  the  question 
was,  how  to  hinder  Protestantism  from  raising  its  head 
in  France."  He  regarded  himself  as  the  absolute  master 
of  the  Reformed  Churches.  "I  am  the  chief  of  the 
Protestant  ministers,"  said  he,  "  since  I  appoint  them." 
Unfortunately  the  Lutheran  and  Calvinistic  Churches 
did  but  too  much  by  their  imprudent  flatteries  to  en- 
courage him  in  cherishing  this  delusion. 

I  know  of  no  more  disheartening  reading  than  the 
ecclesiastical  documents  of  this  period.  One  finds  in 
them  the  same  profanation  of  holy  things,  the  same 
perversion  of  sacred  texts  to  purposes  of  servile  flattery, 
which  disgraced  the  Church  of  the  Byzantine  empire. 
The  leader  of  this  harmonious  choir  of  sycophants  in 
France  was  the  Legate  of  the  Pope.  In  the  circular  in 
which  this  Prelate  established  the  festival  of  St.  Napo- 
leon on  the  15th  of  August,  he  attributed  openly  to  the 
Emperor  the  honor  of  having  borne  the  ark  of  the  cov- 
enant across  the  Jordan  after  its  wanderings  in  the 
wilderness  of  revolution.  "  If  your  children  ask  of 
you,"  added  the  Legate,  "who  has  so  happily  accom- 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  3G3 

plished  such  great  things  for  Christianity,  tell  them  that 
it  is  our  Emperor — he  who  has  imitated  the  illustrious 
Cyrus  and  Darius  in  restoring  the  temple  of  God." 
This  theme  of  the  new  Cyrus  was  varied  to  heart  sick- 
ness, in  the  episcopal  charges.  A  grave  sign  of  the 
depth  of  this  servility  was  manifested  in  the  belligerent 
tone  of  the  ministers  of  a  religion  of  peace,  on  the  break- 
ing out  anew  of  war.  The  English  were  devoted  to  the 
wrath  of  the  Most  High.  Perfidious  Albion  was  com- 
pared to  Tyre  and  Sidon,  and  the  threats  of  the  proph- 
ets turned  against  her  with  an  astonishing  dexterity. 
"  The  voice  of  the  blood  of  our  brothers,"  read  we  in 
one  of  the  episcopal  charges,  "  cries  for  vengeance 
against  the  English."  The  Cardinal-Archbishop  of 
Tours  declared  to  his  diocese,  that  the  war  then  break 
ing  out  was  a  war  of  peace.  The  homage  of  the  clergy 
to  Napoleon  was  never  surpassed  in  abjectness.  u  One 
cannot  render  too  much  honor,"  wrote  Portalis  in  an 
official  paper  in  1803,  "or  manifest  too  much  thanks, 
respect,  and  love  to  the  restorer  of  the  Church  and  State." 
The  clergy  received  him  at  the  threshold  of  the  temple 
with  the  chanting  of  the  hymn,  Behold,  I  send  my  angel 
who  shall  prepare  my  way.  After  the  aspersion  he  was 
conducted  to  the  high  altar,  where  the  Salvum  was  In- 
toned. On  important  occasions  special  protestations  of 
devotion  were  exacted  of  the  clergy.  At  the  time  of  a 
heavy  conscription  Portalis,  the  Minister  of  Public  Wor- 
ship, wrote  to  the  Bishops  a  circular,  in  which  are  found 
these  words :  "  At  a  moment  like  this  it  is  the  duty  of 
the  ministers  of  religion  to  enlighten  and  instruct  the 
citizens,  and  to  make  them  more  than  ever  feel  how 


364        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

much  thanks,  attachment,  and  love  they  owe  to  a  gov- 
ernment which  has  restored  religion,  protected  the  vir- 
tuous, and  repaid  the  evils  which  for  so  long  have 
afflicted  France."  The  addresses  of  the  clergy  to  Na- 
poleon equaled  those  of  the  most  fawning  courtiers. 
In  the  audience  which  he  granted  them  he  expressed 
his  lively  satisfaction,"  and  more  especially  the  pleasure 
he  felt  in  seeing  them  dressed  in  long  gowns.  The 
sacred  militia  had  adopted  the  uniform  which  he  had 
decreed,  and  in  fact  they  received  his  orders  generally 
with  as  much  readiness  as  his  soldiers.  The  Bishop  of 
Dijon  directed  his  Curates  to  charge  the  conscience  of 
the  young  conscripts  with  the  duty  of  fidelity  to  the 
State,  as  the  civil  officer  charged  their  honor!  "  The 
latter,"  said  he,  "  will  attach  their  temporal  interest  to 
their  fidelity;  and  you,  their  eternal  salvation.  Thus 
will  be  established  a  regime  in  which  morality  arises 
from  legislation,  and  in  which  perfect  unity  of  action 
will  exist  between  the  two  powers,  spiritual  and  tem- 
poral, which  are  in  fact  made  for  each  other."  Surely 
never  was  religion  more  servilely  lashed  to  the  chariot 
of  State.  What  least  asylum  could  be  left  for  liberty 
in  a  country  where  the  two  powers  were  thus  united 
together,  the  Bishop  being  no  longer  any  thing  else 
than  a  police  officer  in  a  long  gown!  How  abject  a 
position  for  the  Church  !  And  yet  this  was  practically  all 
the  role  she  played  after  the  conclusion  of  the  so-much- 
vaunted  Concordat,  which,  as  some  will  have  it,  restored . 
the  honor  of  religion. 

The  chief  of  the  State  felt  himself  as  much  at  home  in 
the  temples  of  God  as  in  liis  own  palace.    He  caused 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  365 

the  bulletins  of  the  grand  army  to  be  read  from  the 
pulpits.  When  he  desired  to  repair  its  losses  by  the 
formidable  conscriptions  which  his  Senate  so  subserv- 
iently voted  him,  he  demanded  of  the  Bishops  that  they 
should  aid  his  Prefects  in  enrolling  the  refractory  ones. 
The  government  severely  blamed  all  who  showed  sym- 
pathy for  the  young  boys,  so  many  of  whom  were  hur- 
ried off  immaturely  to  the  wars.  It  caused  a  conscript 
to  be  seized  in  the  sacristy  by  a  squad  of  soldiers  at  the 
moment  when  he  was  about  to  confess  himself.  For 
the  rest,  the  priests  frequently  aided  the  military  in 
this  sad  business.  When  we  consider  the  degree  of 
abasement  to  which  the  majority  of  the  Concordat 
clergy  stooped,  we  must  heartily  subscribe  to  these 
words  of  Bishop  Gregory,  notwithstanding  their  se- 
verity. "  Is  it  not  these  same  men,"  exclaimed  he,  "  who 
ordered  so  many  Te  Deums  for  victories,  and  for  every 
kind  of  scenes  of  carnage,  even  those  of  the  sacrilegious 
war  of  Spain  ?  Is  it  not  these  same  men  who  at  the 
fall  of  the  potentate,  spit  upon  him  to  whom  so  lately 
they  had  burnt  incense,  as  did  also  so  many  Senators, 
Councilors,  Prefects,  and  Judges  ?  Is  it  not  the  same 
ones  who,  after  having  exhausted  the  vocabulary  of 
servility,  worn  all  liveries,  professed  all  doctrines,  and 
made  court  to  all  parties,  finally  managed  to  survive  all 
the  wrecks  ?  " 

The  famous  Imperial  Catechism  which  was  imposed  by 
the  new  empire  on  the  whole  French'  Church,  is  but  too 
well  known.  It  was  a  new  method  of  saying,  Sinite  par- 
vidos  ad  me  venire,  Let  the  little  children  come  unto  me. 
The  curious  chapter  on  the  duties  of  French  Christians 


366        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

to  their  Emperor  has  obtained  a  deserved  notoriety ;  it 
is,  however,  always  profitable  to  recall  these  crimes 
against  conscience,  which  combine  the  ridiculous  with 
the  odious.  "  For  the  first  time  since  the  establishment 
of  Christianity,"  says  Gregory,  "  one  witnessed  the  scan- 
dal of  a  Catechism  gotten  up  expressly  in  the  interest  of 
one  man,  one  family."  Let  us  make  some  extracts  from 
this  edifying  book. 

'"''Question.  What  are  the  duties  of  Christians  in 
regard  to  the  Princes  who  govern  them,  and  what 
are  in  particular  our  duties  toward  Xapoleon  L,  our 
Emperor?  Answer.  Christians  owe  to  the  Princes 
who  govern  them,  and  we  in  particular  owe  to 
Napoleon  I.,  our  Emperor,  love,  respect,  obedience, 
fidelity,  military  service^  and  the  ordinary  tributes  for 
the  preservation  and  expenses  of  the  empire  and  his 
throne.  To  honor  and  serve  our  Emperor  is,  therefore, 
to  honor  and  serve  God  himself.  Question.  Are  there 
not  special  reasons  which  should  attach  us  more 
strongly  still  to  Napoleon  I.,  our  Emperor?  Answer. 
Yes ;  for  it  is  he  whom  God  has  raised  up  in  difficult 
times  to  re-establish  the  public  service  of  the  holy  re- 
ligion of  our  fathers,  and  to  be  its  protector.  He  has 
brought  back  and  preserved  public  order  by  his  pro- 
found and  vigilant  wisdom ;  he  defends  the  State  by 
his  powerful  arm ;  and  he  has  become  the  helper  of  the 
Lord  by  the  consecration  which  he  received  from  the 
sovereign  Pontiff,- the  head  of  the  universal  Church. 
Question.  What  should  we  think  of  those  who  may  be 
lacking  in  their  duty  toward  our  Emperor  ?  Answer. 
According  to  the  Apostle  Paul,  such  persons  would 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  3G7 

resist  the  order  established  by  God  himself,  and  render 
themselves  worthy  of  eternal  damnation." 

It  is  thus  that  the  new  despotism  profaned  at  once 
both  religion  and  the  youth,  and  showed  itself  doubly 
sacrilegious.  Nothing  was  now  lacking  but  to  elevate 
on  the  Yendome  column  the  statue  of  the  god  Mars 
under  the  features  of  General  Bonaparte,  and  to  demand 
its  adoration  after  the  example  of  the  Roman  Cesars. 
The  Papacy  pushed  condescension  so  far  as  openly  to 
approve  the  notorious  Catechism,  and  the  Legate  recom- 
mended its  use  in  all  the  dioceses. 

But  it  is  always  a  difficult  and  perilous  task  to  under- 
take to  control  spiritual  forces.  The  Spirit  moves  where 
it  will,  and  mocks  the  most  cunningly-contrived  net- 
work of  tyranny.  Hence  a  perpetual  inquietude  for  the 
despot  who  desires  himself  to  regulate,  to  dominate,  and 
to  inspire  every  thing.  Napoleon  would  have  wished 
that  no  public  word  should  be  heard  in  all  his  empiro 
without  previously  having  received  the  seal  of  his  Pre- 
fects. The  latter  were  to  watch  very  carefully  the 
charges  and  other  official  acts  of  the  Bishops.  The 
government  complained  that  the  modern  philosophy 
was  too  often  attacked  in  sermons.  The  chief  of  the 
State  corrected,  himself,  the  documents  which  issued 
from  the  Archbishopric  of  Paris.  The  greatest  vigi- 
lance was  recommended  to  the  Bishops  as  to  those 
priests  who  entered  the  pulpit  and  enjoyed  the  so-much- 
feared  right  of  addressing  the  people.  They  were  for- 
bidden all  controversy.  A  preacher  was  thrown  into 
prison  for  having  made  a  philippic  against  Voltaire  and 
Rousseau,  and  the  higher  authority  did  not  blame  the 


368        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

act  in  itself,  but  only  its  administrative  irregularity.  A 
Prefect  who  was  given  to  gustatory  indulgence,  blamed 
his  Bishop  for  having  insisted  so  strongly  on  fasting 
during  Lent.  Even  the  missions  did  not  escape  the 
watchful  eye  of  the  government.  In  1807  the  home 
missions  were  suppressed,  on  pretext  that  they  agitated 
the  people.  As  to  foreign  missions,  Napoleon  desired 
that  they  should  be  authorized  only  so  far  as  they 
might  be  profitable  to  the  State  as  well  as  to  religion. 

The  Emperor  was  not  content  with  keeping  a  vigilant 
watch  over  the  official  papers  of  his  Bishops:  as  at  times 
he  turned  journalist,  so  also  on  occasion  he  essayed  to 
handle  the  episcopal  crook.  He  wrote  to  his  uncle, 
Cardinal  Fesch,*  who  had  recently  been  raised  to  the 
See  of  Lyons,  a  curious  sketch  of  an  edifying  sermon, 
the  object  of  which  should  be  to  restore  peace  in  the 
diocese.  "  Preach  to  the  people,"  wrote  he,  "  that  every 
sentiment  which  leads  to  pride  is  a  sin ;  that  to  wish  to 
humble  one's  neighbor  is  to  violate  the  Gospel,"  etc., 
etc.  This  homily  on  humility  did  not,  however,  hinder 
this  novice  Church  father  from  writing  in  the  following 
spirit,  a  few  days  later,  "  As  to  certain  stubborn  refrac- 
tories, as  soon  as  they  are  discovered  I  will  have  them 
put  out  of  the  way."  In  his  correspondence  we  find  at 
times  very  curious  specimens  of  despotism.  On  one 
occasion  he  ordered  a  Bishop  to  give  such  instructions 
as  would  change  the  spirit  of  his  diocese.  To  change 
the  spirit  of  a  whole  diocese  seemed  to  him  as  easy  as 
to  change  the  uniform  of  his  guard.  He  had  but  an 
imperfect  conception  of  his  impotence  to  rule  in  that 
*  See  Appendix,  note  44. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  369 

domain  of  ideology,  for  which  he  had  indulged  so  much 
sarcasm  and  contempt.  Finding  himself  unable  to  work 
changes  of  opinion  by  order,  he  resorted  to  the  vulgar 
and  arbitrary  measures  which  characterize  all  tyranny. 
He  arrested  and  incarcerated  priests,  and  then  inquired 
of  his  Minister  of  Worship  for  the  canonical  forms  to 
degrade  them.  Later,  and  at  the  height  of  his  contest 
with  the  Holy  See,  he  spoke  only  of  having  the  refrac- 
tory priests  shot.  He  formally  declared  that  such 
would  be  the  fate  of  all  who  respected  the  bull  of  ex- 
communication. Happily  these  menaces  were  not  exe- 
cuted, but  it  is  not  enough  known  that  he  treated  the 
priests  more  than  severely.  -Before  the  Concordat,  a 
priest  who  had  preached  Ultramontanism  in  the  pulpit 
of  St.  Roch  was  thrust  into  an  asylum  as  insane.  The 
clergy  of  Paris,  having  presented  themselves  at  the 
Tuileries  to  make  complaint  to  the  First  Consul,  re- 
ceived this  answer :  "  The  Prefect  has  acted  only  by 
order  of  the  government.  I  wished  to  show  you  that 
when  I  take  the  matter  in  hand  it  is  necessary  that  the 
priests  submit  to  the  civil  power."  He  took  the  matter 
in  hand,  it  would  seem,  pretty  often ;  for  during  his  brief 
reign  more  than  five  hundred  priests  were  imprisoned 
without  trial.  With  the  exception  of  shedding  blood, 
he  pursued  in  Church  matters  the  worst  revolutionary 
policy. 

The  Concordat  had  not  reconciled  the  two  hostile 
parties  of  the  clergy,  and  this  occasioned  frequent  arbi- 
trary measures  on  the  part  of  the  government.  It  re- 
mains for  us  to  show,  that  it  succeeded  no  better  in 

establishing  lasting  peace  between  France  and  the  Holy 

47 


370        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

See.  The  Organic  Articles  were  the  first  ferment  of  dis- 
cord ;  for  they  had  been  made  by  one  of  the  parties  to 
the  detriment  of  the  other,  without  any  antecedent  un- 
derstanding. We  do  not  deny  that  the  civil  power  was 
justifiable  in  taking  precautions  against  the  encroach- 
ments of  the  Papacy ;  this  will  always  be  necessaiy  so 
long  as  the  Pope  is  a  temporal  Prince.  But  what  we 
do  object  to  is,  that  the  civil  power  should  add  at  pleas- 
ure to  the  articles  of  a  treaty  just  concluded,  and  thus 
profiting  by  its  power,  seize  the  lion's  share.  With  his 
usual  audacity  the  First  Consul  had  pursued  this  very 
course,  and  had  thus  left  in  the  heart  of  his  late  ally  a 
bitterness  utterly  inconsistent  with  friendly  relations. 
A  treaty  violated  as  soon  as  concluded,  brings  not  peace 
but  war.  The  good  understanding  continued  so  long 
as  it  seemed  profitable  to  Napoleon,  in  order  to  obtain 
new  concessions  to  the  furtherance  of  his  personal  am- 
bition. According  to  the  playful  expression  of  General 
Lafayette,  he  desired  the  little  phial,  and  wished  to 
astonish  the  world  by  causing  to  be  consecrated  by  the 
hands  of  the  Pope  in  Notre  Dame,  I  will  not  say  the 
representative,  but  the  victorious  son,  of  the  French 
Revolution.  He  resorted  to  the  same  temptation  to 
allure  Pius  VII.  to  yield  to  his  views,  by  which  he  had 
induced  him  to  sanction  the  Concordat.  It  is  well 
known,  the  great  positiveness  which  vague  promises 
a-sume  for  those  who  are  deeply  interested  in  them. 
Nothing  was  easier  than  to  delude  the  aged  Pope,  who 
felt  conscientiously  bound  to  use  every  effort  to  regain 
his  lost  territory.  He  would  have  run  to  the  end  of  the 
world  for  the  shadow  of  a  lost  province;  lie,  therefore, 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  371 

readily  concluded,  that  to  repair  his  losses  was  well 
worth  the  trouble  of  saying  a  mass  in  Paris,  and  so 
much  the  more  as  no  sacrifice  of  conscience  was  re- 
quired. It  cannot  be  doubted  that  it  was  in  the  hope 
of  regaining  the  territory  which  had  been  taken  from 
him,  that  he  resolved  on  the  voyage  to  France ;  for, 
among  other  reasons,  the  petition  which  he  presented  to 
the  government  commenced  thus  :  "  We  have  a  long 
while  doubted  whether,  yielding  to  the  repeated  invita- 
tions of  your  Majesty  to  open  to  you  the  desires  of  our 
heart,  we  should  make  mention  of  the  lands  belonging 
to  the  Holy  See."  These  words  reveal  the  artfulness  of 
the  policy  of  the  First  Consul,  who  had  induced  the 
Pope  to  hope  so  much,  without  making  any  positive 
promise.  The  petition  turns  chiefly  on  the  poverty  of 
the  Holy  See,  and  the  necessity  which  induced  it  to  ask 
the  restoration  of  its  temporal  dominions.  The  Holy 
Father  promised  Xapoleon  the  glory  of  a  Charlemagne, 
if  he  would  imitate  his  munificence  to  the  Church. 
Such  were  the  hopes  that  procured  the  coronation  of 
Xapoleon.  But  Portalis  respectfully  declined  the  claims 
of  the  Pope,  on  the  ground  of  the  rights  of  the  new  gov- 
ernment which  had  been  established  in  Italy.  These 
rights  were,  however,  but  very  slightly  respected  when 
the  Emperor  wished  to  increase  his  own  dominions. 
The  Holy  Father  returned  to  Rome  in  bitter  disappoint- 
ment, and  ill  disposed  to  fresh  concessions,  which,  how- 
ever, the  Emperor  was  soon  going  to  ask. 

Two  incidents  contributed  to  embitter  the  relations 
between  Xapoleon  and  the  Pope.  Joseph  Bonaparte, 
the  youngest  of  the  Emperor's  brothers,  had  married  a 


372        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

very  beautiful  and  worthy  American  lady  of  Baltimore. 
This  marriage  had  violently  irritated  the  despot,  who 
wished  that  henceforth  his  blood  should  be  mingled 
only  with  that  of  the  most  ancient  royal  families.  He 
asked  the  Pope  to  annul  the  marriage  on  the  ground 
that  it  had  been  contracted  with  a  Protestant.  But  the 
reasons  for  the  divorce  did  not  seem  sufficient  at  Rome. 
The  Holy  Father  showed  himself  more  faithful  to  relig- 
ious liberty  than  the  so-called  son  of  the  Revolution. 
"  The  difference  of  worship,"  so  wrote  he  to  Paris,  "  con- 
sidered by  the  Church  as  a  reason  for  nullifying  a  mar- 
riage, does  not  verify  itself  between  two  baptized  per- 
sons, even  though  one  of  them  is  not  a  Catholic." 
Napoleon  insisted  with  emphasis,  though  without 
success. 

The  second  incident  was  Napoleon's  imperious  desire 
of  concluding  between  the  new  kingdom  of  Italy  and 
the  Pope,  a  Concordat  which  should  be  fully  as  favor- 
able to  the  civil  power  as  that  of  1802.  The  Pope  had 
a  thousand  reasons  to  be  less  in  haste  than  he.  Matters 
grew  worse  and  worse.  On  the  13th  of  February,  1806, 
the  Emperor  wrote  to  the  Pope  a  letter  which  was  an 
insult  to  the  whole  Catholic  Church.  "  Our  relations 
ought  to  be  such,"  so  wrote  Napoleon,  "that  your 
Holiness  should  have  for  me  in  temporal  affairs  the 
same  regard  that  I  have  for  you  in  the  spiritual  sphere. 
Your  Holiness  is  sovereign  of  Rome,  but  I  am  its  Em- 
peror. All  my  enemies  should  be  yours  also.  I  am 
responsible  to  God,  who  has  seen  fit  to  use  my  arm  for 
the  restoration  of  religion  ;  and  how  can  I  without  bitter 
grief  see  its  interests  compromised  by  the  mischievous 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  373 

slowness  of  the  Court  of  Rome  ?  For  the  sake  of 
worldly  interests  you  are  letting  souls  perish.  Those 
shall  answer  for  it  before  God,  who  are  so  zealous  in 
protecting  Protestant  marriages."  The  reader  will  not 
forget  that  it  is  the  pretented  representative  of  a  revo- 
lution, made  in  the  name  of  liberty,  who  speaks  thus  to 
the  Roman  hierarchy.  What  a  strange  change  of 
role !  The  rest  of  the  letter  is  in  the  same  spirit. 
"  Though  at  Rome  whole  days  may  be  spent  in  guilty 
idleness,"  said  he,  "  yet  I,  to  whom  God  has  given 
charge  to  watch  over  religion  after  its  many  assaults, 
cannot  and  will  not  remain  indifferent  to  that  which 
contributes  to  the  weal  and  salvation  of  my  people.  I 
cannot  allow  to  be  delayed  a  whole  year,  that  which 
should  be  done  in  two  weeks."  The  Holy  See  re- 
sponded with  firmness,  protesting  especially  against  the 
claim  of  Napoleon  of  being  Emperor  of  Rome.  The 
Pope  used  the  only  powerful  arm  which  remained  to 
him  :  the  refusal  of  bulls  to  confirm  the  newly-nominated 
Bishops  sufficed  to  throw  into  commotion  the  whole 
Church  of  France.  Already  there  was  talk  at  Rome  of 
excommunication.  Napoleon  determined  to  strike  a 
grand  blow.  In  a  letter,  which  on  this  occasion  he 
wrote  to  the  Viceroy  of  Italy,  he  overpassed  all  bounds. 
He  declared  that  the  Pope  who  should  excommunicate 
him  would  for  him  cease  to  be  the  true  Pope,  and  that 
he  would. regard  him  only  as  antichrist,  and  thank  God 
for  his  impotence.  The  following  words  reveal  his  dis- 
position in  regard  to  orthodoxy :  "  If  such  a  thing 
should  be  done,  I  would  separate  my  people  from  all 
communion  with  Rome,  and  I  would  establish  such  a 


374        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

police  as  to  stop  all  clandestine  circulation  of  Papal 
documents.  What  does  Pius  VII.  expect  to  gain  from 
denouncing  me  to  all  Christendom,  from  excommuni- 
cating me  ?  Does  he  think  that  then  their  arms  will 
fall  from  the  hands  of  my  soldiers  ?  The  present  Pope 
took  the  trouble  to  come  to  my  coronation  at  Paris,  but 
he  wishes  that  I  should  restore  him  his  lost  territories. 
I  could  not  and  would  not  do  it.  The  present  Pope  is 
even  yet  too  powerful ;  priests  are  not  fit  for  governing. 
Why  will  not  the  Pope  render  to  Cesar  the  things  of 
Cesar  ?  Is  he  greater  than  Christ  ?  The  time  may  not 
be  far  distant,  if  he  persists  in  giving  me  trouble,  when 
I  will  no  longer  recognize  his  authority  except  as  Bishop 
of  Rome,  and  as  only  an  equal  to  the  Bishops  of  my 
government.  I  will  not  fear  to  call  together  in  council 
the  Gallican,  the  Italian,  the  German,  and  the  Polish 
Churches  for  the  purpose  of  managing  my  affairs  with- 
out a  Pope.  The  duties  of  the  tiara  are  in  fact  only 
humiliation  and  prayer.  Christ  did  not  command  pil- 
grimage to  Rome,  as  Mohammed  did  to  Mecca."  This 
surely  is  admirable  frankness.  For  the  moment  Napo- 
leon is  the  representative  of  the  Revolution,  not  that  of 
Mirabeau,  which  proclaimed  liberty  of  worship,  but  that 
which  fabricated  a  State  Church,  and  enslaved  it  be- 
neath the  foot  of  the  State.  For  the  nonce,  he  was  but 
a  crowned  anarchist. 

This  was  the  precariousness  of  the  condition  created 
by  the  Concordat.  The  gravest  interests  of  religion 
depended  on  the  whims  of  a  shrewd  but  changeable 
man,  who  earnestly  espoused  whatever  policy  the  pas- 
sion of  the  moment  presented.    His  fertile  genius  was 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  375 

expert  in  clothing  his  favorite  idea  of  the  moment  with 
the  most  perfect  reasonableness,  and  producing  for  the 
time  being  the  most  obstinate  and  sincere  conviction. 
He  thought  himself  fully  justified  in  meddling  with  the 
delicate  matters  of  the  soul  and  conscience,  and  he  set- 
tled them  usually  in  such  a  rash  and  arbitrary  manner 
as  continually  to  involve  himself  in  endless  and  danger- 
ous strifes. 

The  result  of  the  discussion  of  the  Emperor  with 
Rome  is  well  known.  The  Pope,  as  soon  as  the  general 
European  war  broke  out,  ceased  to  act  as  a  faithful  and 
reliable  ally.  And  it  would  have  been  unreasonable  to 
expect  him  to  act  otherwise — to  espouse  with  warmth 
the  cause  of  his  oppressor.  The  enemies  of  France  did 
not  fail  to  intrigue  with  the  Pope,  but  they  only  suc- 
ceeded in  compromising  the  little  power  which  he  still 
retained.  The  Papal  city  was  occupied  by  French 
troops,  at  first  provisionally,  at  the  time  of  the  invasion 
of  Naples,  and  afterward  definitively.  On  the  16th  of 
[March,  1808,  the  Papal  troops  were  incorporated  into 
the  imperial  army  by  virtue  of  an  insolent  decree.  The 
Pope  responded  to  these  outrages  in  his  Allocution  of 
the  8th  of  July,  expressing  with  emphasis  his  unshaken 
attachment  to  his  people,  and  inviting  the  Emperor  to 
give  heed  to  wiser  counsels.  But  this  was  only  the 
prologue  of  the  tragedy.  The  decree  which  united  the 
Papal  States  to  the  empire  accomplished  the  measure  of 
bitterness  which  had  been  increasing  from  the  day  when 
the  French  soldiers  crossed  the  threshold  of  the  pontifi- 
cal palace  to  arrest  Cardinal  Pacca,  the  secretary  of  his 
Holiness.    The  bull  of  excommunication,  already  a  long 


376        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

time  prepared,  was  affixed  to  the  walls  of  Rome.  We 
regret  to  see  in  this  bull  complaints  as  to  the  non-resto- 
ration of  the  Papal  territories.  On  that  day  it  would 
have  been  wiser  to  forget  the  temporal  prince,  and  to 
personate  only  the  spiritual  power  in  conflict  with  des- 
potism. On  this  ground  the  Pope  would  have  had 
a  grand  advantage  over  his  enemy. 

How  profound  the  impression  on  the  Catholic  con- 
science which  this  violence  of  the  Emperor  must  have 
produced  throughout  Christendom !  But  still  worse 
than  this  military  violence  was  the  moral  violence  prac- 
ticed at  Savona,  and  afterward  at  Fontainebleau,  on  the 
aged  and  imprisoned  Pope.  By  culpable  persistency 
the  Emperor  succeeded,  by  the  aid  of  some  mercenary 
Prelates,  in  extorting  from  this  captive  Pontiff  the  dis- 
avowal of  his  own  cause.  The  shameful  Concordat 
concluded  at  Fontainebleau  in  1813,  which  surrendered 
to  the  State  all  the  liberties  of  the  Church,  is  a  much 
greater  disgrace  to  the  iron  arm  which  imposed  it  than 
to  the  trembling  hand  by  which  it  was  signed.  The 
authoritative  dissolution  of  the  Council  held  at  Paris  in 
1811,  on  the  day  when  it  seriously  recognized  the  spir- 
itual sovereignty  of  the  Holy  Father ;  the  banishing  of 
the  Cardinals  who  refused  to  violate  the  canon  law  by 
assisting  at  the  second'  marriage  of  Napoleon ;  the  cap- 
tivity of  Cardinal  Pacca,  as  severe  as  the  persecuted 
priests  had  previously  suffered  at  Aix  and  Rochefort — 
all  these  intolerant  measures  reveal  the  triumph  of  the 
worst  revolutionary  passions  under  the  monarchical 
restoration,  and  in  the  bosom  of  a  servile  but  brilliant 
Court,  presided  over  by  an  Austrian  Archduchess. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  377 

The  result  of  this  Concordat  is  its  own  sufficient  con- 
demnation.  We  may  apply  to  the  profound  politician 
who  conceived  it,  the  criterion  which  he  himself  always 
held  as  decisive,  namely,  that  of  success.  Not  only 
may  we  say  to  him,  "  You  have  trampled  upon  right 
and  liberty ;  this  we  know  touches  you  very  little  ;  but 
what  is  more,  you  have  not  succeeded."  Moreover,  he 
has  confessed  it  himself,  and  in  words  which  may  well 
be  cited  at  the  close  of  this  chapter.  "When  Napo- 
leon," says  M.  de  Pradt,  "found  himself  involved  in 
constantly-increasing  religious  strifes ;  when,  after  hav- 
ing labored  to  conciliate  every  thing,  he  found  that  he 
had  only  sown  seeds  of  discord ;  when,  after  having 
counted  on  the  support  of  the  clergy,  he  found  them 
full  of  prejudices  against  him ;  then  he  began  to  inquire 
why  the  result  was  so  different  from  that  which  he  had 
so  confidently  expected:  and  after  collecting  the  sad 
fruit  of  his  experience,  he  acknowledged  with  deep 
grief  the  mistake  he  had  committed  in  occupying  him- 
self with  religion  otherwise  than  as  an  advocate  of  the 
liberty  of  worship.  He  often  repeated,  'The  greatest 
mistake  of  my  reign  is  to  have  made  the  Concordat ; 
but  it  is  too  late  now  to  repent  of  it.  One  reaps  only 
what  one  has  sown.' " 

While  Napoleon  was  regretting  the  Concordat,  one  of 
the  most  intelligent  representatives  of  the  Papacy  ex- 
pressed singularly  bold  views  as  to  the  separation  of  the 
two  powers,  even  at  Rome.  "  However  unwelcome 
might  be  the  loss  of  the  temporal  domains  of  the  Holy 
See,"  wrote  Cardinal  Pacca  in  his  memoirs,  "  I  was  of 

opinion  that  the  Lord  would  make  it  a  great  benefit  to 

48 


378        Religion  and  the  Eeign  of  Terror. 


the  Church.  I  thought  that  the  fall  of  the  temporal 
power  of  the  Popes  would  destroy,  or  at  least  enfeeble 
that  jealousy  and  blind  antipathy  which  exist  almost 
every-where  against  the  clergy  and  the  Court  of  Rome  ; 
that  the  Pontiffs,  delivered  from  the  heavy  burdens  of 
temporal  cares,  would  consecrate  thenceforth  all  their 
attention  to  the  spiritual  good  of  their  flock ;  that  the 
Church,  deprived  of  the  pomp  of  honors  and  riches, 
would  no  longer  see  the  ranks  of  her  clergy  filled  except 
by  such  as  4  desire  a  good  work and  that  the  Popes 
would  no  longer  have  so  much  regard  to  rank  and 
courtly  recommendations  in  the  choice  of  their  council- 
ors and  ministers,  and  in  the  Papal  promotions  in  gen- 
eral, of  which  one  could  often  say  that  though  the 
priesthood  was  multiplied,  yet  the  joy  of  the  Church 
was  not  increased.  In  fine,  one  would  no  longer  have 
reason  to  fear  that  the  ecclesiastical  decisions  might  be 
influenced  by  unworthy  political  and  material  con- 
siderations." 

Would  to  heaven  that  this  experience,  so  dearly 
bought  by  both  the  contracting  powers  in  the  Concor- 
dat, had  not  so  soon  been  lost !  We  would  then  not  see 
as  we  do  now,  after  the  lapse  of  more  than  half  a  cen- 
tury, fully  as  many  inextricable  difficulties  presented  in 
the  relations  of  the  civil  to  the  religious  power,  as  existed 
at  the  close  of  the  French  Revolution. 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  379 


CONCLUSION. 

In  returning  from  Notre  Dame  after  the  solemnities  in 
honor  of  the  ratification  of  the  Concordat,  Napoleon 
made  this  remark  :  "  Now  the  French  Revolution  is  fin- 
ished."  This  book  has  shown  how  erroneous  was  this 
view.  Not  only  was  the  French  Revolution  not  com- 
pleted, but  it  had  been  arrested  in  the  very  net  in 
which  it  had  become  entangled  at  the  outset,  and  in 
some  measure  confirmed  in  its  most  fatal  error.  That 
.  which  most  decidedly  had  found  its  end,  was  the  regime 
of  intolerance  and  persecution ;  the  legal  equality  of 
Protestantism  with  Catholicism  was  established  irrevo- 
cably. But  in  respect  to  sincere  religious  liberty,  the 
Revolution  had  scarcely  begun.  With  the  exception  of 
a  short  and  stormy  period,  during  which  the  separation 
of  Church  and  State  had  been  proclaimed  and  realized 
with  surprising  success  in  the  midst  of  great  obstacles, 
the  heavy  hand  of  the  civil  power  had  not  for  a  single  mo- 
ment ceased  to  weigh  upon  the  religious  conscience.  And 
as  this  conscience  is  the  ultimate  fountain  of  liberty,  des- 
potism had  taken  the  surest  of  precautions  against  all 
moral  independence.  Persecution  had  been  succeeded 
by  enslaving  protection.  The  great  corporations,  which 
in  the  past  had  guaranteed  some  independence  to  the 
Church  and  nobility,  had  disappeared,  and  there  re- 
mained as  opposed  to  the  State  nothing  but  disarmed 
individuals,  to  whom  all  right  of  association  and  discus- 
sion was  severely  interdicted.  Nothing  was  easier  than 
for  the  civil  power  to  shape  at  its  pleasure  this  plastic 


380        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

clay ;  but  the  State  soon  had  reason  to  feel  how  fragile 
is  every  edifice  constructed  of  such  materials.  The  true 
cement  was  lacking,  that  of  liberty,  and  liberty  in  its 
highest  character,  that  of  the  soul.  No,  the  Revolution 
was  not  complete  in  1801. 

Nor  is  it  yet  at  this  day.  Neither  general  liberty  nor 
religious  liberty  in  particular,  has  received  a  sufficient 
consecration.  On  the  first  point,-  all  disinterested  friends 
of  the  liberal  cause,  of  whatever  school,  are  agreed, 
there  being  few  indeed  who  are  entirely  satisfied  with 
our  present  condition.  The  current  of  opinion  in  favor 
of  larger  and  better  guaranteed  liberties  is  irresistible,  l 
whatever  may  be  said  or  done  to  check  it.  Neither 
force  nor  favor  will  effectually  check  it  for  a  single  day. 
On  the  second  point  the  interest  is  less  lively ;  there  is 
too  much  indifference  as  to  religious  liberty,  and  there 
are  yet  many  so-called  liberals  who  seem  to  fear  it.  It  is 
certain  that  in  the  France  of  1864  the  liberty  of  worship 
does  not  exist.  The  Organic  laws  are  still  in  force,  and 
they  put  into  the  hand  of  the  State  a  powerful  means  of 
cramping  the  Churches  which  it  salaries.  Every  asso- 
ciation for  worship  is  under  the  necessity  of  procuring  a 
previous  authorization.  And  the  government  seems  to 
regard  it  as  among  its  sacred  duties,  jealously  to  watch 
over,  and  too  often  to  check,  all  religious  manifestations 
outside  of  the  State  Churches.  The  perplexing  and 
vexatious  contests  which  result  from  the  traditional 
relations  of  the  State  and  Church  are  incessantly 
renewed. 

The  experience  of  the  reigns  which  preceded  that  of 
Napoleon  III.  would  seem  sufficiently  conclusive.  Was 


Religion  and>  the  Reign  of  Terror.  381 

not  the  Bourbon  monarchy  under  Louis  XVIII.  and 
Charles  X.  in  great  part  ruined  by  its  close  alliance 
with  the  ultra-Catholic  party  ?  Both  the  State  and  the 
Church  lost  credit  by  this  pernicious  political  union. 
The  monarchy  of  Louis  Philippe  cannot  be  admired 
either  for  its  distrust  of,  or  its  concessions  to,  the  same 
party.  Its  relations  to  the  Catholic  Church  were  often 
far  from  honest  and  frank,  and  it  was  rewarded  by  a 
disaffection  which  was  very  dangerous  in  the  hour  of 
trial.  Under  the  present  government  the  matter  has 
been  little  better.  A  struggle,  silent  or  open,  and  al- 
ways dangerous,  has  from  time  to  time  broken  out 
between  the  Church  and  the  State,  while  the  religious 
sentiment  itself  has  either  grown  torpid,  or  been  per- 
verted too  much  to  the  defense  of  earthly  interests. 
The  clashing  of  personal  interests  in  the  midst  of  a 
sluggishness  of  convictions,  a  movement  of  intrigues  in 
the  absence  of  sober  thought — such  is  the  result  of  our 
abnormal  condition. 

The  soul  itself  of  France  is  bound  and  hampered  by 
the  administrative  net-work  which  guards  it  on  every 
side,  and  nowhere  allows  free  expression,  either  by  word 
or  association,  to  political  belief  or  to  religious  faith. 
Let  the  authorities  beware.  This  moral  captivity  ener- 
vates the  nation,  arid  will  finally  either  turn  its  activity 
into  pernicious  and  base  channels,  of  which  a  vile  litera- 
ture is  the  surest  sign,  or  plunge  it  into  the  terrible 
distraction  of  war.  It  is  time  to  emancipate  this  noble 
and  generous  soul  of  France,  and  to  free  the  giant  from 
the  innumerable  fetters  with  which  it  is  bound,  as  if  it 
were  asleep  in  the  land  Lilliput.    Such  is  the  noble  task 


382        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

and  the  earnest  aspiration  of  the  true  liberalism  of  to 
day. 

We  could  wish  above  all  that  it  might  escape  from  the 
grave  misunderstanding  which  has  induced  it  to  sacrifice 
the  substance  for  the  shadow.  Constitutional  guarantees 
have  high  worth  when  there  is  any  thing  real  to  guaran- 
tee, namely,  the  positive  liberty  of  the  individual,  his 
effectual  protection  in  the  exercise  of  all  his  rights  and 
faculties.  All  effort  will  be  in  vain  so  long  as  our  ad- 
ministrative system  remains  unchanged,  so  long  as  the 
citizen  is  sacrificed  to  the  State.  It  is  the  sort  of  lib- 
erty that  existed  at  Sparta,  at  Rome,  and  in  the  France 
of  Napoleon  I.  ;  it  is  at  bottom  a  despotism,  all  the 
more  insupportable  as  it  piques  itself  on  being  liberal. 
The  first  empire,  though  falling  at  Waterloo,  yet  left  its 
political  system  deeply  stamped  on  the  national  spirit. 
While  retiring  from  the  country  it  thrust  back,  like  the 
Parthian,  a  mortal  dart.  This  dart  must  be  torn  out  of 
the  vitals  of  the  nation  before  we  enjoy  true  liberty. 
Now  as  there  is  nothing  more  characteristic  of  this  fatal 
system  than  the  enslavement  of  religion,  it  is  the  safest 
course  to  begin  the  reform  at  this  very  point,  and  pos- 
itively to  arrest  the  empire  of  civil  law  as  soon  as  it 
approaches  the  threshold  of  the  domains  of  conscience. 
All  liberalism  which  does  not  begin  by  enfranchising 
the  conscience  is  counterfeit ;  it  takes  up  and  continues 
the  fatal  French  tradition,  that  which  prevailed  from 
Louis  XIV.  to  the  time  of  the  First  Consul. 

We  have  hoped  to  serve  not  only  the  cause  of  relig- 
ion, but  also  that  of  liberalism  in  its  highest  interests,  by 
disengaging  from  the  confusion  of  facts,  the  great  lesson 


Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror.  383 

which  results  from  the  religious  and  ecclesiastical  strug- 
gles of  the  French  Revolution.  This  lesson  is  con- 
tained in  that  famous  formula,  A  free  Church  in  a  free 
State,  which  imposes  itself  with  more  or  less  force  on  all 
generous  spirits.  Let  it  be  well  understood,  there  can 
be  no  free  State  without  a  free  Church — I  mean  one 
that  is  entirely  free,  without  salary,  without  fetters, 
without  "  organic  laws,"  and  under  the  simple  sway  of 
the  common  law.  Thus  will  be  guaranteed  against  the 
encroachments  of  monarchical  as  well  as  of  demagogic 
despotism,  the  sacred  asylum  of  religious  liberty,  which 
is  the  fountain  of  all  other  liberties;  and  universal 
suffrage  will  be  taught  that  for  its  tumultuous  waves, 
as  well  as  for  the  waves  of  the  ocean,  there  is  a  higher 
authority  which  says,  Thus  far  and  no  farther.  The 
false  idol  of  popular  sovereignty,  Vox  populi,  vox  Dei, 
will  be  broken.  Such  a  reform  will  react  on  the  whole 
political  organization,  and  will  establish  the  true  line 
of  demarkation  between  the  rights  of  government  and 
the  personal  liberty  of  individuals.  Then  the  Church, 
existing  in  its  normal  condition,  and  deriving  its  life 
from  liberty,  will  find  it  to  its  highest  interest  to  serve 
and  defend  the  civil  authority.  Thus  will  be  cemented 
that  holy  and  fruitful  alliance  between  religion  and 
liberalism,  the  want  of  which  was  so  fatal  to  the 
French  Revolution,  and  the  realization  of  which  would 
inaugurate  for  our  country  the  new  and  definitive  era 
to  which  we  aspire.  Then,  truly,  the  French  Revolu- 
tion will  have  been  accomplished,  for  it  will  have 
emancipated  the  conscience,  and  made  thereof  the 
immovable  rock  upon  which  the  whole  State  edifice 


384:        Religion  and  the  Reign  of  Terror. 

reposes.  We  will  close  by  repeating  the  noble  thought 
of  Mirabeau :  God  is  as  necessary  as  liberty  for  the 
French  people.  The  great  orator  was  too  much  the 
child  of  his  era  to  give  to  these  words  the  whole  of  their 
significancy.  It  is  for  us,  who  have  seen  what  he  did 
not  see,  and  who  know  how  precarious  is  that  liberty 
which  is  viewed  only  as  a  human  right, — how  prompt  it 
is  to  grow  feeble  and  venal ; — it  is  for  us,  the  heirs  and 
admirers  of  that  great  Revolution  which  we  desire  to 
accomplish  by  correcting  and  completing  it,  to  declare 
again  with  the  fullness  of  absolute  conviction,  that  God 
is  indeed  as  necessary  as  liberty  for  the  French  people. 
Nothing  but  the  Divine  idea  can  safeguard  liberty ;  and 
the  necessary  condition  of  this  effectual  guardianship  is, 
that  liberty  itself  be  regarded  as  of  God.  Every  thing, 
therefore,  brings  us  back  to  the  principle :  A  free  Church 
in  a  free  State. 


APPENDIX. 


Theae  Notes  are  compiled  from  the  "  New  American  Cyclopedia," 
"  Lroekhaus's  Real-Encyclopiidie,"  "  Herzog's  Eeal-Encyclopadie 
flir  Protestautische  Theologie,"  and  various  other  sources. 

Note  1. — Voltaire.    See  page  25. 

This  notorious  and  profane  wit  was  born  at  Paris,  February 
20,  1694.  Educated  under  the  direction  of  dissolute  priests, 
his  l;eart  and  mind  were  early  perverted  by  the  influence  of 
bad  examples  and  false  philosophy.  Subjected  in  his  youth 
to  several  imprisonments  for  trifling  offenses,  he  conceived  a 
bitter  hostility  to  arbitrary  power,  and  gave  abundant  expres- 
sion thereto  both  in  his  historical  and  in  his  anti-religious  writ- 
ings throughout  his  long  life.  Voltaire  was  not  simply  unbe- 
lieving, he  was  impious.  His  critical  knowledge  was  super- 
ficial, and  to  supply  this  lack  he  resorted  to  ridicule  and 
contempt,  speaking  of  man  without  modesty,  and  of  God 
without  respect.  He  hesitated  at  nothing — lies,  calumnies,  or 
perfidious  accusations ;  and  so  lacking  was  he  in  moral  senti- 
ment, that  he  was  the  first  to  laugh  at  his  own  unworthy  acts. 
Though  professing  to  believe  in  an  eternal  God,  this  being 
became  in  his  hands  a  mere  puppet,  a  blind  fatality  indifferent 
to  the  affairs  of  men.  Condorcet  says,  "He  remained  in  almost 
absolute  doubt  as  to  the  personal  existence  of  the  soul  after 
the  death  of  the  body."  With  all  his  bad  qualities,  however, 
he  was  not  entirely  destitute  of  virtues:  he  hated  injustice, 
and  loved  humanity.  Witness  his  efforts  in  behalf  of  the 
persecuted  Calas  and  Labarre.  When  old  age  began  to  ap- 
proach, sadness  preyed  upon  his  spirit.    His  popularity  de- 

4(J 


APPENDIX. 


clined,  and  strangers  ceased  to  throng  to  his  little  court.  The 
thought  of  death,  which  he  could  not  always  banish,  was 
attended  only  with  doubt  and  uncertainty.  But  he  succeeded 
well  in  hiding  his  gloom  under  a  laughing  countenance ;  yet 

,it  was  most  real,  and  at  times  betrayed  itself.  "'I  have  one 
thing  more  to  say  in  my  general  confession,"  wrote  he  to  a 
friend,  "  and  that  is,  my  gayety  has  always  been  forced."  It 

'  was  perhaps  in  one  of  these  states  of  gloom  that  he  became  for 
a  moment  reconciled  to  the  Catholic  Church,  and  partook  of 
the  eucharist.  Restored  to  health  and  hope,  he  was  ashamed 
of  himself,  and  represented  the  act  to  his  Mends  as  simply 
a  daring  parody  on  the  mysteries  of  religion.  But  no  one 
believed  him ;  philosophers  shrugged  their  shoulders  and 
pitied  him,  while  religious  men  were  scandalized  by  the  mis- 
erable profanation. 

Wishing  to  see  Paris  again  before  he  died,  he  set  out  from 
Ferney  in  his  eighty-fifth  year ;  but  he  arrived  only  to  die, 
though  he  was  welcomed  with  universal  enthusiasm.  From 

.  the  streets,  from  the  windows,  resounded  on  every  side,  "  Long 
live  the  savior  of  Calas ! "  l<  Long  live  the  author  of  Zaire  !  " 
He  was  covered  with  garlands,  and  the  people  threw  them- 
selves at  his  feet  and  kissed  his  garments.  But  his  triumph 
was  of  only  a  few  weeks'  duration.  Princes  and  the  great  of 
the  earth  overwhelmed  him  with  visits.  "  I  am  smothering," 
said  he,  "  but  with  roses."  Dr.  Franklin,  the  American  em- 
bassador, visited  him  in  the  company  of  his  grandson.  "  My 
son,"  said  he,  "  fall  upon  your  knees  before  this  great  man ;" 
and  Voltaire  blessed  the  boy  with  the  words,  "  God  and  lib- 
erty." He  grew  feebler,  but  was  not  suffered  to  die  in  peace. 
Priests  surrounded  him  in  his  last  agonies,  and  extorted  from 
him  a  confession,  in  which  he  said,  "  If  God  disposes  of  me  I 
die  in  the  holy  Catholic  religion,  in  which  I  was  born,  hoping 
that  Divine  mercy  will  deign  to  pardon  all  my  faults  ;  and  if  I 
have  cast  scandal  upon  the  Church  I  ask  pardon  of  it  and  of 
God."  The  expiring  life  flickered  once  more,  and  the  sick 
man  recanted.  In  his  last  moments  he  is  said  to  have  with- 
stood a  priest  who  asked  of  him,  "  Do  you  believe  in  the  Di- 


APPENDIX. 


387 


vinity  of  Jesus  Christ  ? '  "  For  God's  sake,"  replied  Voltaire, 
"  speak  no  more  of  that  man,  and  let  me  die  in  peace." 
Among  his  latest  words  are  said  to  have  been  these  :  "  I  die 
worshiping  God,  loving  my  friends,  not  hating  my  enemies, 
but  detesting  superstition."  Though  some  of  these  details  are 
contested,  it  is  still  certain  that  this  great  man  died  May,  1778, 
without  the  sacraments,  and  amid  unspeakable  convulsions. 

The  Archbishop  of  Paris  forbade  his  burial  in  consecrated 
ground,  and  it  was  with  the  greatest  difficulty  that  his  friends 
were  able  to  give  his  body  secret  infermeut  in  an  obscure  vil- 
lage church  remote  from  Paris.  The  French  government  was 
equally  ungenerous.  It  forbade  the  newspapers  to  notice  his 
death,  the  theaters  to  play  his  pieces,  and  the  Academy  to  pro- 
nounce his  eulogy.  But  his  old  friend,  Frederick  of  Prussia, 
caused  the  Berlin  Academy  to  do  him  honor,  and  the  Empress 
Catharine  XL  of  Russia  openly  mourned  the  event. 

The  indignity  offered  to  his  remains  by  the  priests  and  the 
government  explains,  and  apologizes  in  part  for,  the  extraor- 
dinary honor  subsequently  rendered  to  his  name  by  the  revo- 
lutionists. The  obscure  church  in  which  he  wTas  buried  was 
sold,  and  the  cities  of  Troves  and  Romilly  contested  for  the 
honor  of  possessing  his  bones.  Paris,  where  he  had  died,  now 
petitioned  the  Constituent  Assembly  that  his  body  might  be 
brought  back  and  buried  in  the  Pantheon,  that  cathedral  of 
philosophy.  It  was  granted,  and  on  July  11,  1791,  the  au- 
thorities went  in  a  body  to  the  city  gate  to  welcome  his  mortal 
remains.  The  coffin  was  placed  on  the  site  of  the  Bastille, 
and  exposed  to  the  multitudes  the  rest  of  the  day.  The  next 
day  the  body  of  Voltaire  was  mounted  on  a  triumphal  car 
drawn  by  twelve  magnificently  caparisoned  white  horses,  and 
drawn  in  procession  through  the  city  toward  the  Pantheon. 
The  National  Assembly  and  all  the  chief  official  bodies  of 
the  city  surrouuded,  preceded,  or  followed  the  sarcophagus. 
Nothing  could  surpass  the  enthusiasm  of  the  day,  or  the  ful- 
some laudations  that  were  devoted  to  the  memory  of  the  great 
scoffer  by  the  unbelieving  generation  of  the  Revolution. — See 
•'Methodist  Quarterly,"  October,  1866. 


388 


APPENDIX. 


Note  2. — Rousseau.    See  page  39. 

Jean  Jacques  Rousseau,  the  French  skeptic  whose  writings 
played  such  an  important  part  in  occasioning  and  in  pervert- 
ing the  French  Revolution,  was  born  at  Geneva,  June  28,  1712. 
His  father  being  an  erratic  watchmaker,  and  his  mother  hav- 
ing died  at  his  birth,  he  was  brought  up  by  an  aunt.  Plu- 
tarch, Richardson,  Grotius,  and  Tacitus  were  the  favorite 
authors  of  his  boyhood.  An  apprentice  at  the  age  of  fifteen, 
he  fled  from  his  hard  master,  and  finally  found  a  home  in  the 
house  of  a  Madame  Warens,  who  gave  him  facilities  for  educa- 
tion, corrupted  his  morals,  and  induced  him  to  renounce  Cal- 
vinism, in  which  he  had  been  raised,  and  embrace  Romanism. 
In  this  home  he  spent  several  years  in  the  study  of  Latin, 
music,  and  general  literature.  In  1741,  at  the  age  of  twenty- 
nine,  he  came  to  Paris,  led  a  life  of  shame,  and  supported 
himself  by  his  pen.  As  yet,  however,  he  was  unknown  to  the 
great  public.  In  1749  the  Academy  of  Dijon  offered  a  prize 
for  an  essay  on  the  question,  Whether  the  progress  of  science 
and  art  had  improved  or  corrupted  the  morals  of  mankind  ? 
Rousseau  eagerly  caught  the  subject,  and  assailed  the  cause  of 
civilization  in  strains  of  impassioned  eloquence.  He  gained 
the  prize,  and  created  an  extraordinary  sensation. 

He  was  immediately  regarded  as  one  of  the  greatest  men  of 
the  age,  and,  though  awkward  in  manner,  admitted  into  all 
circles  of  society.  In  1753,  returning  to  Geneva,  he  was  wel- 
comed to  his  native  city  with  marks  of  the  highest  respect. 
Here,  in  order  to  regain  his  rights  as  citizen,  he  again  changed 
his  religion,  and  embraced  Calvinism.  But  he  was  not  long 
in  the  enjoyment  of  his  happiness.  His  jealous  disposition  in- 
volved him  in  bickerings  with  Voltaire.  Soon  after,  he  quar- 
reled with  his  infidel  friends  Grimm  and  Diderot.  About  this 
time,  when  fifty  years  of  age,  he  published  his  two  most  cele- 
brated works,  Emile  and  the  Contrat  Social,  in  which  he  vio- 
lently assailed  the  political  principles  of  the  day,  as  well  as 
the  cause  of  civilization  in  general.    These  brought  upon  him 


APPENDIX. 


380 


a  shower  of  what  he  regarded  as  unjust  persecution.  The  par- 
liament of  Paris  pronounced  Emile  impious  and  blasphemous, 
ordered  it  to  be  burned  by  the  hangman,  and  called  for  the 
arrest  of  the  author.  He  fled  to  Geneva ;  but  Geneva,  imitat- 
ing Paris,  expelled  him  from  the  Republic.  Fleeing  to  Neuf- 
chatel,  he  was  soon  involved  in  quarrels  with  the  Calvinists, 
and  forced  again  to  escape.  Hoping  to  find  rest  in  a  little 
island  in  Lake  Bienne,  he  was,  on  the  contrary,  immediately 
ordered  to  depart  by  the  Senate  of  Berne.  He  now  accepted 
•  the  invitation  of  Hume,  who, offered  him  an  asylum  in  England. 
But  suspicion  toward  his  new  friend  soon  arose  in  the  diseased 
mind  of  Rousseau.  Angry  correspondence  followed.  Mr. 
Hume  closed  it  with  a  letter  whose  last  words  were  a  cold, 
contemptuous,  eternal  farewell.  How  different  the  feelings  of 
these  two  foes  of  religion,  from  those  of  Messrs.  Whitefield  and 
Wesley  during  and  at  the  close  of  their  temporary  estrange- 
ment !  Rousseau  hastened  to  France,  and  after  leading  a  vag- 
abond life  from  city  to  city,  ever  imagining  himself  surrounded 
by  spies  and  enemies,  finally  reached  Paris.  This  was  in  1770. 
Here  he  spent  nearly  the  whole  of  the  remaining  eight  years  of 
his  life.  But  he  was  very  unhappy.  His  misanthropy  contin- 
ually increased,  and  occasionally  led  him  to  acts  bordering  on 
insanity.  Desirous  to  escape  the  noise  of  the  city,  he  accepted 
the  offer  of  a  friend,  and  retired  to  Ermenouville,  not  far  from 
Paris,  but  lived  only  a  few  weeks  longer.  The  accounts  of  his 
death,  which  occurred  July  2,  1778,  in  his  sixty-seventh  year, 
are  conflicting.  Some  say  that  he  died  of  apoplexy  after  a 
morning  walk,  others  that  he  shot  himself;  others  that,  dying 
in  full  possession  of  his  senses,  he  asked  to  be  borne  to  the 
window,  and  casting  his  eyes  upon  the  luxuriant  landscape 
and  the  serene  sky,  bade  a  calm  adieu  to  the  world. 

As  to  the  moral  character  of  Rousseau  there  can  be  but  one 
opinion — it  was  detestable.  He  was  a  lawless  enthusiast, 
leading  a  life  of  open  shame.  His  life  was  strangely  incon- 
sistent with  his  own  favorite  theories.  A  railcr  against  the 
refinements  of  civilization,  he  was  only  satisfied  when  moving 
amid  the  artificiality  of  Paris.    An  opponent  of  theaters,  he 


390 


APPENDIX. 


wrote  for  them  operas  and  dramas.  An  antagonist  of  religious 
persecution,  he  assigned  the  penalty  of  death  for  all  who  dis- 
sented from  his  new  religion  of  Deism.  A  pretended  discov- " 
erer  of  a  more  humane  system  of  education  for  youth,  he 
ruthlessly  abandoned  his  five  children  to  the  uncertain  and 
cold  charities  of  the  foundling  asylum.  The  woman  with 
whom  he  lived  the  last  thirty  years  of  his  life  was  a  dull,  un- 
interesting person.  After  having  lived  together  twenty  years, 
they  were  finally  married  in  form.  Such  was  the  man  whose 
writings  did  so  much  toward  shaping  the  French  Revolution. 
As  in  the  case  of  Voltaire,  his  bones  were  borne  in  triumph 
to  the  Pantheon. 


Note  3. — Talleybaxd.    See  page  46. 

This  brilliant  statesman,  but  unworthy  priest,  was  born  at 
Paris  January  13,  1754.  The  eldest  son  of  one  of  the  first 
noble  families  of  Southern  France,  his  childhood  was  neg- 
lected. Receiving  in  youth  a  hurt  causing  lameness  for  life, 
his  birthright  was  given  to  a  younger  brother,  and  himself 
destined  to  the  Romish  priesthood.  Neglecting  his  theologi- 
cal studies  at  the  seminary  of  St.  Sulpjce,  he  was  introduced  to 
society  in  1774  as  an  abbot,  and  soon  manifested  such  lawless 
propensities  as  to  occasion  several  months  of  imprisonment  in 
the  Bastille.  Changing  his  course,  however,  he  soon  became  a 
friend  of  Necker,  Mirabeau,  and  Calonne,  and  in  1787  was  a 
member  of  the  House  of  Notables.  The  next  year  he  was 
made  Bishop  of  Autun,  with  a  salary  of  sixty  thousand  francs. 
A  clerical  Deputy  in  the  Constituent  Assembly,  he  was  a  sup- 
porter of  the  most  radical  liberal  measures.  It  was  he  who 
proposed  the  great  patriotic  festival  of  July  14,  1790 ;  and  on 
this  solemnity,  aided  by  two  hundred  priests,  who  wore  the 
national  colors  over  their  white  robes,  he  officiated  at  the  great 
altar  which  had  been  erected  on  the  Champ  de  Mars.  His 
liberal  course  in  politics  and  religion  caused  him  to  be  ex- 
communicated by  the  Pope.    On  the  fall  of  the  King  he  fled 


APPENDIX. 


391 


to  England,  and  thence  to  the  United  States,  where  he  amassed 
quite  a  fortune,  and  studied  American  institutions.  Through 
Madame  de  StaeTs  influence  the  Convention  allowed  him  to 
return  to  France,  and  in  1797  he  became  Minister  of  Foreign 
Affairs.  When  Bonaparte,  returned  from  Egypt,  he  procured 
an  interview  between  him  and  Sieves,  induced  Barras  to  resign, 
and  thus  greatly  contributed  to  the  coup  uVe'tat  of  Brumaire 
18,  1799,  which  laid  the  corner-stone  of  the  Empire.  Under 
Bonaparte  he  was  Minister  of  Foreign  Aifairs  for  eight  years. 
Released  from  excommunication  and  from  his  clerical  vows  in 
1804,  he  formally  took  as  his  wife  Madame  Grant,  with  whom 
he  had  already  lived  the  last  seven  years.  Toward  the  close  of 
Napoleon's  career  he  became  estranged  from  him,  and  in  his 
hour  of  adversity  contributed  to  his  downfall.  So  skillful  had 
been  his  management,  that  at  the  fall  of  the  Empire  he  wa9 
perhaps  the  most  popular  man  in  France,  and  he  came  in  for  a 
large  share  of  favor  under  Louis  XVHL  and  Louis  Philippe. 
Toward  the  close  of  life  he  returned  to  religious  practices,  and 
in  1838  died,  reconciled  to  the  Church,  at  the  ripe  age  of 
eighty-four. 

The  moral  character  of  this  actor  in  the  Revolution  is  evi- 
dently none  of  the  best.  His  great  trait  was  flexibility  of  prin- 
ciple, or  at  least  of  conduct.  Though  it  has  been  well  re- 
marked that,  when  personal  interest  did  not  forbid,  he  always 
remained  true  to  the  generous  principles  of  liberty  which  in- 
spired his  youth.  The  weak  point  of  his  character  was  ava- 
rice. Many  shrewd  sayings  are  attributed  to  him,  and  among 
others  this,  which  has  become  a  sort  of  motto  for  diplomatists, 
namely,  that  the  principal  olycct  of  language  is  to  conceal  thought. 


Note  4. — Sieves.    See  page  46. 

This  revolutionary  priest  and  statesman  was  born  at  Frejus 
in  1748,  and  died  at  Paris  in  1836.  Having  taken  orders,  he 
received  a  canonship  in  Brittany  in  1784,  but  as  the  Revolu- 
tion drew  near  devoted  his  whole  attention  to  politics  and 


392 


APPENDIX. 


philosophy.  A  member  of  the  first  Assembly,  he  contributed 
largely  to  the  triumph  of  liberal  principles.  Though  protest- 
ing against  the  trial  of  the  King,  he  yielded  to  the  current, 
and  voted  for  his  death.  In  1799  he  conspired  with  Bona- 
parte to  overthrow  the  Directory,  though  between  these  men 
there  existed  a  mutual  personal  enmity.  On  the  restoration  of 
the  Bourbons  he  was  banished  as  a  regicide,  and  retired  to 
Brussels ;  but  after  the  Revolution  of  July,  1830,  he  returned 
to  Paris,  and  after  spending  in  retirement  the  last  few  years  of 
his  eventful  life,  died  at  the  advanced  age  of  eighty-eight. 

Of  the  character  and  principles  of  Sieyes,  Mignet  expresses 
himself  thus  :  "  Matured  by  solitude  and  philosophical  studies, 
he  was  adapted  to  create  a  sect  and  sway  a  wide  influence  in 
a  time  of  commotion.  He  thoroughly  knew  the  springs  of 
society.  Cool  in  temperament,  ardent  for  truth,  he  was  auto- 
cratic, disdainful,  and  impatient  of  contradiction.  With  him 
half  truth  was  error.  He  imparted  his  ideas  to  others,  and 
shrouded  himself  in  a  sort  of  mystery.  He  had  more  disciples 
than  colleagues.  The  first  Constitution  was  almost  wholly  of 
his  own  creation."  As  opposed  to  this  opinion  of  the  philoso- 
pher Mignet,  Talleyrand  is  said  to  have  regarded  Sieyes  as  not 
profound ;  and  Bonaparte  is  rerjorted  to  have  said  that  he 
would  readily  sell  his  visionary  theories  for  a  good  round  sum. 


Note  5. — Gregory.    See  page  47. 

Henry  Gregory,  [Gr^goire,]  the  radical  republican,  and  per- 
haps the  most  noble  evangelical  Christian  actor  in  the  French 
Revolution,  was  born  in  1750,  and  owed  his  early  education  to 
the  Jesuits.  After  having  studied  at  Nancy,  and  before  taking 
orders,  he  served  some  time  as  a  teacher.  Having  called  to 
himself  public  attention  by  a  book  in  the  interest  of  the 
Jews,  he  was  chosen  in  1789  as  a  clerical  Deputy  to  the  Na- 
tional Assembly.  A  member  of  the  Breton  Club,  out  of  which 
the  Jacobin  was  afterward  developed,  he  advocated  radical 
changes  both  in  Church  and  State.    He  even  went  so  far  as  to 


APPENDIX. 


393 


say  once,  that  to  be  a  King  was  a  mortal  sin.  As  Bishop  of 
Blois  in  the  Constitutional  Church,  his  services  for  religion  are 
a  precious  heritage  of  the  universal  Church.  With  him  poli- 
tics and  religion  were  closely  allied.  He  was  liberal  in  poli- 
tics, because  he  was  warmly  evangelical  in  religion.  At  the 
head  of  the  French  clergy  when  Bonaparte  came  to  power,  he 
would  doubtless,  by  the  aid  of  his  colleagues,  soon  have  in- 
troduced evangelical  reforms  in  the  Catholic  Church  of  France, 
had  not  the  First  Consul,  in  his  ambition  to  be  crowned  by  the 
Pope,  destroyed  the  happily-begun  work,  and  reintroduced  the 
full  sway  of  the  Papacy  with  all  its  abuses.  When  all  the 
Bishops  resigned,  in  order  that  Bonaparte  might  nominate 
them  anew,  or  others  in  their  place,  Gregory's  name  was  left 
out.  Under  Napoleon  he  was  afterward  a  Senator,  and  on  the 
restoration  of  the  Bourbons  lived  in  privacy,  devoted  to  relig- 
ious and  scientific  studies. 

Gregory  was  true  to  his  principles  to  the  last,  and  died  in 
Paris,  May  28,  1831,  at  the  age  of  eighty,  without  having  re- 
called the  oath  which  he  took  in  1791.  Despite  the  prohibi- 
tion of  the  Archbishop  of  Paris,  faithful  priests  administered 
to  him  the  last  rites  of  the  Church. 


Note  6. — Mthabeau.    See  page  54. 

Of  the  life  of  this  world-renowned  character  a  mere  note  can 
contain  but  meager  outlines.  Born  of  noble  parentage  in 
Provence,  March  9,  1749,  he  was  treated  by  a  tyrant  father 
with  great  brutality,  and  his  moral  education  was  utterly 
neglected.  For  youthful  crimes  he  was  several  times  confined 
in  gloomy  dungeons.  Disowned  by  his  father,  he  turned  to 
literature,  and  led  a  life  of  crime.  From  his  career  of  unpar- 
alleled excess  and  wretchedness,  the  outbreak  of  the  Revolu- 
tion called  him  to  a  brief  career  of  triumph  and  glory.  Re- 
jected by  the  nobility  because  he  possessed  no  feif  of  his  own, 
he  threw  himself  upon  the  people,  and  was  sent  from  Aix  as 
Deputy  to  the  States-General.    His  extraordinary  activity  now 

50 


394: 


APPENDIX, 


soon  destroyed  his  already  broken  constitution.  On  returning 
from  the  sitting  of  March  27,  1791,  in  which  he  had  made  five 
speeches,  his  physician,  Cabanis,  saw  immediately  that  his  end 
was  at  hand.  He  lingered  but  a  few  days.  After  a  night  of 
terrific  sufferings,  at  day-break  he  addressed  his  friend  Cabanis : 
"  My  friend,  I  shall  die  to-day.  When  one  has  come  to  such 
a  juncture  there  remains  only  one  thing  to  be  done ;  that  is,  to 
be  perfumed,  crowned  with  flowers,  and  intoxicated  with 
music,  in  order  sweetly  to  enter  into  that  slumber  from  which 
there  is  no  awaking."  Ordering  his  bed  to  be  brought  to 
the  window,  he  looked  with  rapture  at  the  brightness  of  the 
sun  and  the  freshness  of  his  garden.  "  If  this  be  not  God," 
said  he,  "  it  is  like  him." 

He  died  at  eight  o'clock  the  same  evening,  April  2,  1791. 
All  Paris  mourned  him.  The  funeral  was,  if  we  except 
that  of  Napoleon,  December  15,  1840,  the  grandest  which 
France  has  ever  beheld.  At  the  close  of  the  services  at  St. 
Eustache,  twenty  thousand  fire-arms  were  discharged  at  once. 
Every  window  was  shattered,  and  the  people  feared  that  the 
church  would  fall  in  upon  the  coflin.  The  body  of  the  great 
man  was  then  borne  in  triumph  to  the  Pantheon. 

As  to  Mirabeau's  character,  Lamartine  says :  "  At  the  foot  of 
the  tribune  he  was  a  man  devoid  of  shame  or  virtue ;  in  the 
tribune,  he  was  an  honest  man.  The  chilling  materialism  of 
his  age  had  crushed  in  his  heart  the  expansion,  force,  and 
craving  for  imperishable  things.  Neither  his  character,  acts, 
nor  thoughts  have  the  impress  of  immortality.  If  he  had 
believed  in  God  he  might  have  died  a  martyr." 


Note  7. — Rabaut  St.  Etienne.    See  page  63. 

Rabaut  St.  Etienne  was  a  Protestant  clergyman,  and  one  of 
the  most  consistent  and  honorable  of  the  revolutionists.  He 
was  born  at  Nimes  in  1741,  and  executed  at  Paris,  December 
5,  1793.  He  was  an  eloquent  speaker  and  writer,  and  had  the 
courage  to  protest  against  the  right  of  the  Convention  to  try 


APPENDIX. 


395 


the  King.  He  was  involved  in  the  fall  of  the  Girondists.  He 
fell  a  victim  to  the  cause  of  truth  and  liberty. 


Note  8. — James  Necker.    See  page  68. 

James  Necker,  the  famous  French  financier,  was  born  of  a 
German  family  at  Geneva,  in  1732.  He  amassed  immense 
wealth  as  a  banker,  and  obtained  celebrity  as  a  political  and 
religious  writer.  A  Protestant  himself,  he  married  the  talented 
daughter  of  a  Swiss  Pastor,  and  became  the  father  of  the  cele- 
brated Madame  de  Stael.  He  died  at  Copet,  near  Geneva,  in 
1804. 


Note  9. — Barnave.    See  page  71. 

A.  P.  J.  M.  Barnave,  born  at  Grenoble  in  1761,  was  a  Prot- 
estant, and  became  celebrated  for  his  eloquence  and  liberalism 
in  the  early  period  of  the  Revolution.  Foreseeing  the  Reign 
of  Terror,  he  generously  endeavored  to  save  the  King,  but  fell 
himself  before  the  sweeping  torrent  of  popular  madness. 
Brought  before  the  bloody  tribunal  of  Tinville,  he  defended 
himself  with  such  power  as  to  bring  even  Camille  Desmoulins 
to  tears.  Arrived  at  the  scaffold,  he  raised  his  eyes  to  heaven 
and  exclaimed,  "Behold  at  length  the  reward  for  all  I  have 
done  for  liberty  1 "  He  was  guillotined  November  29,  1793, 
at  the  age  of  thirty-one. 


Note  10. — Petion.    See  page  72. 

Jerome  Potion,  born  at  Chartres,  1753,  distinguished  himself 
in  the  early  part  of  the  Revolution  as  a  violent  anarchist. 
Elected  to  the  mayoralty  of  Paris  over  Lafayette,  he  participated 
in  the  insurrection  of  August  10,  and  made  no  effort  to  check 
the  dreadful  massacres  of  September.  The  first  President  of 
the  Convention,  he  showed  signs  of  a  milder  policy,  and  be- 


396 


APPENDIX. 


came  involved  in  the  fate  of  the  Girondists.  Escaping  from 
Paris,  and  failing  to  raise  an  insurrection  of  the  people,  he 
wandered  about  for  some  months,  and,  having  either  starved 
or  shot  himself,  was  finally  found  in  a  field  half  devoured  by 
wolves. 


Note  11. — Lameth.    See  page  80. 

Three  brothers  of  this  name  took  part  in  the  Revolution. 
They  had  all  taken  service  under  Lafayette  in  the  American 
war.  1.  Alexander  served  in  the  first  Assembly  of  France, 
fled  with  Lafayette,  was  imprisoned  in  Prussia,  and  returned 
and  held  office  under  the  Consulate.  He  died  1829.  2.  Charles, 
the  next  in  importance,  born  1757,  among  the  first  of  the  no- 
bles to  join  the  Third  Estate,  was  a  moderate  revolutionist,  and 
fled  his  country  in  1792 ;  but  returning  in  1800  he  took  mili- 
tary service  under  Napoleon,  and  died  a  partisan  of  Louis 
Philippe  in  1832.  3.  Theodore,  like  his  brothers,  a  Constitu- 
tionalist, fled  to  Switzerland  during  the  Reign  of  Terror.  He 
died  in  1837,  aged  eighty-one. 


Note  12. — Robespierre.    See  page  89. 

This  notorious  Terrorist  was  born  at  Arras  in  1759.  His 
mother  dying  in  his  childhood,  and  his  father  neglecting  him, 
he  was  thrown  on  the  public,  and  received  his  education  from 
the  charity  of  some  priests,  who  enabled  him  to  study  eight 
years  at  the  college  of  Louis  le  Grand  at  Paris.  Returning  to 
Arras  he  began  the  practice  of  law,  and  it  is  curious  enough 
to  notice  that  his  first  important  case  was  a  defense  of  the 
introduction  of  Franklin's  lightning  rods  against  the  charge  of 
impiety,  (1783.)  Lamartine  describes  him  as  of  slight  figure, 
angular  limbs,  shrill  voice,  forehead  small  and  projecting,  eyes 
sunken  and  blue,  wide  nostrils,  large  mouth,  thin  lips,  pointed 
chin,  and  complexion  sallow  and  livid.  A  Deputy  of  the 
Third  Estate  in  1789,  he  was  marked  from  the  beginning  as  a 


APPENDIX. 


397 


theoretical  radical.  Of  slender  means,  he  occupied  poor,  ill- 
furnished  lodgings,  sent  one  fourth  of  his  meager  pay  of  eight- 
een francs  a  day  to  his  sister,  and  appeared  in  the  tribune 
in  a  threadbare  olive-green  coat,  the  only  one  he  possessed. 
On  the  death  of  Mirabeau  he  rose  rapidly  in  influence.  From 
June,  1791,  to  April,  1792,  he  held  the  office  of  Public  Ac- 
cuser. Though  not  a  member  of  the  Legislative  Assembly,  he 
was  none  the  less  influential  as  an  officer  in  the  municipality, 
and  as  an  orator  of  the  Jacobins.  In  the  Convention  he  led 
the  Jacobins  in  bringing  the  King  to  trial  and  execution. 
From  this  time  till  his  fall  he  was  a  sort  of  king  of  the  Terror- 
ists. Arrested  and  condemned  by  the  Convention  as  a  con- 
spirator, he  was  rescued  by  the  Jacobins  and  taken  to  the 
Hotel  de  Ville.  Disappointed  in  his  expectation  that  the 
populace  would  enable  him  to  overturn  the  Convention,  he 
was  arrested  and  guillotined  July  29,  1794,  at  the  age  of 
thirty-six. 

The  closing  scene  of  his  life  I  copy  from  Alison  :  "  Henriot 
descended  the  stair  of  the  Hotel  de  Ville,  but  seeing  the 
square  deserted  he  vented  his  execrations  on  his  faithless  fol- 
lowers, who  had  for  the  most  part  abandoned  the  King  in  the 
same  manner  on  the  10th  of  August,  and  hastened  back  to  his 
comrades.  The  conspirators  finding  themselves  unsupported 
gave  themselves  up  to  despair.  The  National  Guard  rushed 
rapidly  up  the  stairs,  and  entered  the  room  where  Robespierre 
and  the  other  leaders  of  the  revolt  were  assembled.  Robes- 
pierre was  sitting  with  his  elbow  on  his  knees,  and  his  head 
resting  on  his  hand.  Meda  discharged  his  pistol,  which  broke 
his  under  jaw,  and  he  fell  under  the  table.  St.  Just  implored 
Le  Bas  to  put  an  end  to  his  life.  4  Coward,  follow  my  exam- 
ple,' said  he,  and  blew  out  his  brains.  Couthon  was  seized 
under  a  table,  feebly  attempting  to  strike  with  a  knife,  which 
he  wanted  the  courage  to  plunge  in  his  heart.  Coffiuhal  and 
the  younger  Robespierre  threw  themselves  from  the  windows, 
and  were  seized  in  the  inner  court  of  the  building.  Henriot 
had  been  thrown  down  the  stairs  by  Corfinhal ;  but  though 
bruised  and  mutilated,  he  contrived  to  crawl  into  the  entrance 


398 


APPENDIX. 


of  a  sewer,  from  whence  he  was  dragged  out  by  the  troops  of 
the  Convention.  Robespierre  and  Couthon  being  supposed  to 
be  dead  were  dragged  by  the  heels  to  the  Quai  Pelletier, 
where  it  was  proposed  to  throw  them  into  the  river ;  but  it 
being  discovered  when  day  returned  that  they  still  breathed, 
they  were  stretched  on  a  board  and  carried  to  the  Assembly. 
The  members  having  refused  to  admit  them,  they  were  con- 
veyed to  the  Committee  of  General  Safety,  where  Robespierre 
lay  for  nine  hours  stretched  on  a  table,  the  same  with  that 
where  he  had  signed  the  death  warrant  of  so  many  noble  citi- 
zens, with  his  broken  jaw  still  bleeding,  and  suffering  alike 
under  bodily  pain  and  the  execrations  and  insults  of  those 
around  him. 

"  During  the  whole  time  that  this  cruel  torture  lasted  he 
evinced  a  stoical  apathy.  Foam  merely  issued  from  his  mouth, 
which  the  humanity  of  some  around  him  led  them  to  wipe  off; 
but  his  finger  still  with  convulsive  energy  was  fixed  on  the  holster 
of  the  pistol  which  he  had  not  had  the  courage  to  discharge. 
From  thence  he  was  sent  to  the  Conciergerie,  where  he  was 
confined  in  the  same  cell  which  had  been  occupied  by  Danton, 
Hebert,  and  Chaumette.  At  length  he  was  brought  with  all 
his  associates  to  the  Revolutionary  Tribunal,  and  as  soon  as 
the  identity  of  their  persons  was  established  they  were  con- 
demned. 

"  At  four  in  the  morning  on  the  29th  of  July  all  Paris  was  in 
motion  to  witness  the  death  of  the  tyrant.  He  was  placed  on 
the  chariot  between  Henriot  and  Couthon,  whose  remains  were 
as  mutilated  as  his  own.  The  crowd,  which  had  long  ceased 
to  attend  the  executions,  manifested  the  utmost  joy  at  their 
fate.  He  was  conducted  to  the  Place  de  la  Revolution ;  the 
scaffold  was  placed  on  the  spot  where  Louis  XVI.  and  Marie 
Antoinette  had  suffered.  The  blood  from  his  jaw  burst 
through  the  bandage  and  overflowed  his  dress ;  his  face  was 
ghastly  pale.  He  shut  his  eyes,  but  he  could  not  close  his  ears 
against  the  imprecations  of  the  multitude.  A  woman,  breaking 
from  the  crowd,  exclaimed,  'Murderers  of  all  my  kindred, 
your  agony  fills  me  with  joy ;  descend  to  hell  covered  with 


APPENDIX. 


399 


the  curses  of  every  mother  in  France  ? '  Twenty  of  his  com- 
rades were  executed  before  him.  When  he  ascended  the  scaf- 
fold the  executioner  tore  the  bandage  from  his  face ;  the 
lower  jaw  fell  upon  his  breast,  and  he  uttered  a  yell  which 
filled  every  heart  with  horror.  For  some  minutes  the  frightful 
figure  was  held  up  to  the  multitude ;  he  was  then  placed 
under  the  ax,  and  the  last  sounds  which  reached  his  ears  were 
the  exulting  shouts,  which  were  prolonged  for  some  minutes 
after  his  death. 

"Along  with  Robespierre  were  executed  Henriot,  Couthon, 
St.  Just,  Dumas,  Coffinhal,  Simon,  and  all  the  leaders  of  the 
revolt.  St.  Just  alone  displayed  the  firmness  which  had  so 
often  been  witnessed  among  the  victims  whom  they  had  sent 
to  the  scaffold.  Couthon  wept  with  terror.  The  others  died 
uttering  blasphemies,  which  were  drowned  in  the  cheers  of  the 
people.  They  shed  tears  for  joy,  they  embraced  each  other  in 
transport;  they  crowded  round  the  scaffold  to  behold  the 
bloody  remains  of  the  tyrants.  '  Yes,  Robespierre,  there  is  a 
God,'  said  a  poor  man  as  he  approached  the  lifeless  body  of 
one  so  lately  the  object  of  dread.  His  fall  was  felt  by  all 
present  as  an  immediate  manifestation  of  the  Divinity." 


Note  13. — Camille  Desmotjlins.    See  page  84. 

This  man,  who  was  born  in  Picardy  in  1762,  and  guillotined 
in  Paris,  April  5,  1794,  was  one  of  the  most  active  and  interests 
ing  characters  of  the  whole  French  Revolution.  He  was  a 
schoolmate  of  Robespierre,  and  an  intimate  friend  of  Marat 
and  Danton.  Scarcely  equaled  as  a  popular  orator,  he  was 
yet  more  powerful  as  a  satirical  journalist.  After  contributing 
largely  to  bring  the  Revolution  to  the  Reign  of  Terror  he 
became  finally  sick  of  its  excesses,  and  for  the  purpose  of 
bringing  about  a  milder  policy,  established  in  January,  1794,  a 
journal  called  the  Old  Cordelier.  His  eloquent  denunciations 
of  the  policy  of  the  extremists  now  brought  upon  him  the 
wrath  of  Robespierre  and  the  Jacobins.    When  Robespierre 


400 


APPENDIX. 


proposed  that  his  writings  should  be  burned,  Desmoulins  ex- 
claimed in  indignation,  "  To  burn  is  not  to  answer,"  and  from 
that  hour  his  fate  was  sealed.  Once  condemned  to  death,  he 
spent  his  remaining  hours  alternately  in  reading  Rousseau  and 
the  "  Night  Thoughts "  of  Young,  in  making  sarcastic  allu- 
sions to  his  enemies,  and  in  weeping  at  the  thought  of  being 
separated  from  his  worthy  and  beautiful  wife,  Lucile.  When 
the  executioners  came,  he  demeaned  himself  like  a  madman. 
All  the  way  to  the  scaffold  he  harangued  the  crowd,  imploring 
rescue.  Among  his  last  words  were,  "Behold  the  reward  of 
the  first  apostle  of  liberty.  But  the  monsters  who  murder  me 
will  not  survive  me  long.  Send  this  lock  of  hair  to  my 
mother-in-law."  His  adored  wife  was  executed  a  few  days  later. 


Note  14. — Prus  VI.    See  page  119. 

This  unfortunate  Prelate  was  born  in  Italy  in  1717,  and  died 
in  Valence,  France,  August  29,  1799.  He  was  elected  to  the 
Papal  chair  in  1775.  He  had  scarcely  settled  his  difficulties 
with  the  Emperor  of  Austria  when  he  found  a  greater  enemy 
in  the  French  Republic.  Dethroned  by  the  French  general, 
Berthier,  February  15,  1798,  he  was  conducted  to  France,  and 
imprisoned  at  Valence.  He  was  graceful,  affable,  and  learned. 
His  reign  had  been  mild,  and,  as  compared  to  those  of  other 
Popes,  even  liberal. 


Note  15. — Brienne.    See  page  124. 

Lomenie  de  Brienne,  a  French  politician  and  Cardinal,  born 
1724,  deceased  in  Paris  February  14,  1794,  was  made  Minister 
of  Finance  in  1787,  but  lost  all  credit  in  a  few  months,  and 
was  dismissed.  He  was  arrested  by  the  revolutionists  in  1794, 
and  treated  with  such  barbarity  that  he  died  the  same  night 
of  apoplexy. 


APPENDIX. 


401 


Note  16. — Gobel.    See  page  124. 

This  weak  and  cowardly  Archbishop  of  Paris  early  em- 
braced the  Revolution,  and  often  brought  contempt  both  upon 
himself  and  his  cause.  He  was  seventy  years  of  age  when,  unde* 
the  pressure  of  fear,  he  abjured  the  Christian  religion,  and  sacri- 
ficed in  his  own  Cathedral  Church  to  the  Goddess  of  Reason. 
He  was  arrested  and  condemned  to  death  as  an  Atheist  in 
1794.  During  his  imprisonment  his  genuine  convictions,  as 
far  as  he  had  any,  regained  the  ascendency,  and  he  sought 
consolation  by  returning  to  the  religion  which  he  had  so 
shamelessly  disavowed.  On  his  way  to  the  scaffold  he  ear- 
nestly recited  the  prayers  for  the  dying. 


Note  17. — Lanjuenais.    See  page  134. 

This  French  jurist  and  statesman  was  born  at  Rennes  in 
1753,  and  died  in  Paris  in  1827.  One  of  the  most  gifted  mem- 
bers of  the  Constituent  Assembly,  and  of  the  Convention,  he 
was  a  thorough  Republican ;  but  siding  with  the  Girondists, 
he  was  outlawed  in  June,  1793.  He  succeeded,  however,  in 
secreting  himself  for  eighteen  months  in  a  closet  in  his  own 
house  until  the  storm  had  passed.  Though  faithful  to  his 
principles,  he  accepted  favors  from  Napoleon,  and  afterward 
from  Louis  XVHI.  He  was  versed  in  the  Oriental  languages, 
.and  among  many  other  honors,  was  made  a  member  of  the 
Philosophical  Society  of  Philadelphia.  Lamartinc  says  of 
him,  "  He  was  a  Christian  philosopher,  his  revolutionary  ideas 
being  but  a  form  of  his  evangelical  faith." 


Note  18.— Bailly.    See  page  135. 

This  philosopher  and  statesman,  whose  abuse  and  sufferings 
in  the  hour  of  death  will  excite  the  indignation  and  sympathy 
of  mankind  to  the  latest  generations,  was  born  at  Paris  in 
17o0,  and  executed  November  12,  1793,  in  the  same  city. 

51 


402 


APPENDIX. 


After  having  led  a  quiet,  scholarly  life  till  his  fiftieth  year,  tie 
was  suddenly  thrown  into  the  tumult  of  politics  in  1789.  His 
noble  conduct  as  first  president  of  the  Constituent  Assembly, 
and  later  as  Mayor  of  Paris,  is  well  known.  Retiring  before 
the  storm  in  September,  1791,  he  was  arrested  and  brought  to 
Paris  in  1793.  His  execution  is  described  by  Lamartine  in 
substance  as  follows :  "  His  punishment  was  simply  a  pro- 
tracted assassination.  His  head  bare,  his  hair  cut  off,  his 
hands  tied  behind  him  with  a  large  rope,  his  body  covered 
only  by  a  thin  shirt  beneath  a  freezing  sky,  he  slowly  trav- 
ersed the  city  of  Paris,  the  scum  of  the  capital  ragirjg  like  an 
insulting  torrent  around  the  death  cart.  Men  carried  at  his 
side  a  red  flag  at  the  end  of  a  long  pole.  This  they  dipped 
from  time  to  time  in  the  filth  of  the  gutters  and  dashed  it  then 
into  Bailly's  face.  Others  spit  upon  him.  His  features,  lacer- 
ated and  soiled  with  filth  and  blood,  almost  lost  the  human 
form.  This  awful  march  to  death  lasted  three  hours.  Arrived 
at  the  Field  of  Mars,  which  the  populace  had  designated  as 
the  place  of  his  sufferings,  he  was  forced  to  walk  around  the 
field  on  foot,  and  even  to  kiss  the  ground  itself.  But  here  a 
new  whim  seized  the  mob.  They  ordered  the  guillotine  to  be 
taken  down,  and  to  be  reconstructed  close  to  the  Seine  up^n  a 
dung-heap  accumulated  from  the  sewers  of  Paris.  The  mon- 
sters loaded  the  old  man's  shoulders  with  beams,  and  com- 
pelled him  to  drag  himself  along  under  the  weight.  On  the 
way  he  fainted.  He  was  now  compelled  to  watch  for  another* 
hour  the  reconstruction  of  the  scaffold.  Meantime  rain  and 
snow  fell,  and  his  body  was  chilled  with  cold.  But  the  souJ 
of  the  martyr  of  liberty  trembled  not.  He  pitied  his  degraded 
persecutors,  and  confided  himself  to  immortality."  His  history 
of  astronomy  is  still  a  standard  work. 


Note  19. — The  Girondists.    See  page  143. 


The  severe  fate  of  these  rash,  inexperienced,  but  sincere 

revolutionists  will  always  render  them  a  subject  of  tender 


APPENDIX. 


403 


interest.  As  a  whole  they  were  not  Christians.  They  were 
deterred  from  the  Church  as  they  then  saw  it,  by  their  earnest 
love  of  freedom ;  but  their  hearts  were  full  of  noble  aspira- 
tions. While  in  prison  awaiting  the  hour  of  execution  their 
thoughts  were  necessarily  turned  to  the  question  of  immor- 
tality. Some  of  their  last  words,  as  reported  by  Lamartine, 
are  interesting.  From  him  I  select  as  follows  :  "  '  What  shall 
we  be  doing  to-morrow  at  this  time  ? '  asked  Ducos  toward  the 
morning  of  the  last  day.  Each  had  a  different  reply.  '  We 
shall  sleep  after  the  fatigues  of  the  day,'  replied  some.  Fon- 
frede,  Gensonne,  Carra,  Fauchet,  and  Brissot  spoke  in  conii- 
dence  of  the  immortality  of  the  soul.  'We  are  not  sublime 
dupes,'  said  Vergniaud,  'but  beings  who  obey  their  moral  in- 
stinct, and  who,  when  they  have  fulfilled  this  duty,  suffer,  or 
enjoy,  in  immortality  the  destinies  of  humanity.  Let  us  die, 
then,  not  with  hope,  but  with  assurance.  Death  is  but  the 
greatest  act  of  life,  since  it  gives  birth  to  a  higher  state  of 
existence.'  Daylight  began  to  pour  into  the  windows.  '  Let 
us  go  to  bed,'  said  Ducos ;  '  life  is  such  a  trifling  thing  that  it 
is  not  worth  the  hour  of  sleep  we  lose  in  regretting  it.'  '  Let 
us  watch,'  said  Lasourcc ;  '  eternity  is  so  certain  and  so  terrible 
that  a  thousand  lives  would  not  suffice  to  prepare  for  it.'  A 
pious  priest,  Lambert,  attended  the  prisoners.  When  Brissot 
saw  him  he  sprang  to  him,  but  declined  his  offices.  To  the 
question,  '  Do  you  believe  in  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  and 
the  providence  of  God?'  he  replied,  'I  do  believe  in  them, 
and  it  is  because  I  believe  in  them  that  I  am  about  to  die.' 
Fauchet,  the  unfaithful  Bishop,  confessed  his  sins,  and  received 
absolution.  Then  he  in  turn  heard  the  confession  of  Sillery, 
and  pronounced  his  absolution.  But  the  terrible  death-cart 
arrived,  and,  each  leaving  some  little  legacy— a  watch,  or  a 
lock  of  hair — to  wife  or  friend,  they  went  forth,  and  bravely 
perished  for  the  cause  of  liberty. 


404 


APPENDIX. 


Note  20. — Couthon.    See  page  155. 

Georges  Couthon,  one  of  the  worst  and  most  violent  charac- 
ters of  the  Revolution,  was  born  in  1756,  and  executed  July  28, 
1794.  He  was  one  of  the  most  extreme  of  the  radicals.  He 
was  largely  guilty  of  the  blood  of  the  Girondists,  stood  by  St. 
Just  and  Robespierre  in  the  Committee  of  Public  Safety,  and 
when  the  hour  of  trial  came  tried  to  stab  himself,  but,  lacking 
the  courage,  was  borne  to  the  guillotine. 


Note  21. — Roland.    See  page  170. 

This  sfern,  philosophic,  political  extremist  was-  bo**n  at 
Lyons  in  1732,  and  committed  suicide  November  15,  1793. 
He  was  involved  in  the  fate  of  the  Girondists.  He  escaped 
arrest,  however ;  but  a  few  days  later  learning  of  the  execu- 
tion of  his  gifted  wife,  he  deliberately  resolved  not  to  survive 
her,  and  going  out  upon  the  public  road,  seated  himself  at  the 
foot  of  a  tree  and  stabbed  himself  with  his  cane-sword.  In 
his  pocket  was  found  a  paper  with  these  curious  words : 
"  Whoever  thou  art  that  findest  these  remains,  respect  them  as 
those  of  a  man  who  consecrated  his  life  to  usefulness,  and  who 
dies  as  he  has  lived,  virtuous  and  honest.  On  hearing  of  my 
wife's  death  I  would  not  live  another  day  upon  this  earth  so 
stained  with  crirnes."  His  wife's  last  words  breathe  a  similar 
spirit :  "  O  liberty,  what  crimes  are  committed  in  thy  name ! " 
Both  of  them  were  examples  of  ancient  Roman,  rather  than 
of  Christian,  virtue. 


Note  22. — Legendre.    See  page  172. 

Legendre  was  one  of  the  coarsest  actors  in  the  Revolution. 
His  previous  life  of  sailor  and  butcher  seem  to  have  added  to 
his  natural  ferocity.  He  was  active  in  the  taking  of  the  Bas- 
tille, in  the  invasion  of  the  Tuileries  June  20,  1792,  in  the 


APPENDIX. 


405 


founding  of  the  Cordelier  Club,  and  in  the  Committee  of 
Public  Safety.  Subsequently  becoming  more  'moderate,  he 
acted  as  a  member  of  the  Council  of  the  Five  Hundred.  He 
died  in  1797,  and,  by  bequeathing  his  own  body  to  the  sur- 
geons for  dissection,  made  it  seem  less  strange  that  he  had 
proposed  to  cut  up  that  of  Louis  XVI.,  and  divide  it  among 
the  eighty-six  Departments  of  France. 


Note  23. — Marat.    See  page  193. 

Marat  was  a  sort  of  plebeian  Nero.  Born  in  1746  in  Switz- 
erland, he  had  early  obtained  some  reputation  for  proficiency 
in  jihilosophy  and  medicine.  In  the  early  part  of  the  Revolu- 
tion he  became  noted  as  a  demagogue  journalist.  His  thirst 
for  vulgar  popularity  was  only  equaled  by  his  thirst  for  blood. 
His  propositions,  to  hang  at  one  time  eight  hundred  Deputies 
on  as  many  trees  of  the  Tuileries,  to  execute  two  hundred  and 
seventy  thousand  suspected  persons  to  appease  the  people, 
and  that  all  the  towns  of  France  should  imitate  the  massacres 
of  Paris,  are  simple  examples  of  his  general  spirit.  On  the 
defeat  of  Dumouriez,  he  proposed  trying  all  the  generals  en 
masse  for  treason.  For  various  excesses  he  was  at  one  time 
brought  to  trial,  but  the  demagogue  tribunal  acquitted  him. 
By  his  very  excesses  in  wickedness,  and  by  his  pandering  to 
the  populace,  he  finally  arrived  at  dictatorial  influence,  and 
disposed  of  the  lives  of  men  at  will.  At  last  courage  arose 
out  of  "despair,  and  a  noble  young  woman,  Charlotte  Corday, 
assassinated  him  July  13,  1793,  thus  freeing  the  world  of  a 
monster,  and  France  of  a  remorseless  tyrant.  But  it  is  the 
shame  of  the  human  race  that  after  his  death  he  was  for  a  time 
almost  worshiped.  After  the  fall  of  Robespierre,  however,  his 
remains,  which  had  been  placed  in  the  Pantheon,  were  taken 
thence  and  cast  into  a  public  sewer. 


406 


APPENDIX. 


Note  24. — Barrere.    See  page  193. 

Barrere,  a  brilliant  but  unprincipled  revolutionist,  was  bom 
in  1755,  and  died  at  Paris  1841,  aged  eighty-six.  He  was  a 
leader  of  the  Jacobins,  and  the  author  of  several  expressions 
which  became  very  popular,  such  as,  "The  tree  of  liberty 
grows  only  when  watered  by  the  blood  of  tyrants,"  and  "  It  is 
only  the  dead  who  do  not  come  back  again."  A  coward,  he 
fawned  upon  Robespierre  so  long  as  he  was  powerful,  but  on 
his  fall  required  only  one  day  to  go  over  to  the  other  political 
pole.  Rejected  by  Napoleon,  he  was  compelled  to  live  in 
exile  in  Belgium,  but  the  Revolution  of  1830  allowed  him 
to  return  to  France. 


Note  25. — Condorcet.    See  page  196. 

Condorcet,  a  materialistic  theorist,  with  unbounded  confi- 
dence in  the  perfectibility  of  science,  was  born  in  1743.  He 
was  involved  in  the  fall  of  the  Girondists,  and  poisoned  him- 
self in  1794  to  escape  the  guillotine. 


Note  26. — Collot  D'Herbois.    See  page  200. 

Collot  d'Herbois,  born  in  1750,  at  first  an  actor,  became 
afterward  one  of  the  most  sanguinary  of  revolutionists.  Sent 
to  Lyons  with  Fouche  to  punish  the  inhabitants  for  revolting, 
he  found  the  guillotine  too  slow,  and,  collecting  the  prisoners 
in  ranks,  caused  them  to  be  mown  down  by  cannon  shot. 
He  confessed  that  on  one  occasion  sixty  were  cut  down  by  a 
single  shot.  He  was  a  licentious  drunkard,  without  a  redeem- 
ing trait.  Banished  to  Cayenne  with  other  scoundrels  in  1795, 
he  died  soon  after  in  terrible  torments  from  having  drunk  a 
bottle  of  brandy  while  suffering  from  yellow  fever. 


APPENDIX. 


407 


Note  27. — Lebon.    See  page  200. 

Lebon,  at  first  a  humane  priest,  caught  the  intoxication  of 
revolution,  and  finally  became  one  of  the  worst  of  Terrorists, 
mingling  beastly  profligacy  with  unquenchable  bloodthirsti- 
ness.    He  was  guillotined  in  1795  at  the  age  of  thirty. 


Note  28. — Clootz.    See  page  201. 

Jean  Baptiste  Clootz,  self-styled  Anacharsis,  a  Prussian  baron, 
born  at  Cleves  in  1755,  and  guillotined  at  Paris,  March  23, 1794, 
was  a  fanatical  revolutionist  and  maudlin  philanthropist,  for 
whom,  in  point  of  consistent  absurdity,  a  parallel  is  scarcely 
to  be  found  in  the  whole  scope  of  history.  Educated  from 
childhood  in  Paris,  and  without  any  healthful  restraint  on  his 
enthusiastic  and  imaginative  nature,  he  early  conceived  the 
idea  of  reforming,  the  human  race,  and  actually  made  journeys 
in  England,  Germany,  and  Italy  for  its  propagation.  Return- 
ing to  France  in  1789,  he  was  made  a  French  citizen  by  the 
Legislative  Assembly,  and  expressed  his  thanks  therefor  in  the 
following  words :  "  Charles  I.  had  a  successor,  Louis  XVI.  will 
have  none.  You  know  how  to  appreciate  the  heads  of  the 
jmilosophers ;  it  now  only  remains  to  set  a  price  on  the  heads 
of  tyrants."  For  the  cause  of  the  Revolution  he  lavished 
freely  his  immense  income,  and  offered  to  raise,  himself,  a  regi- 
ment of  Prussians.  As  member  of  the  Convention,  he  voted 
for  the  King's  death  "  in  the  name  of  mankind,"  and  added, 
"  I  condemn  likewise  the  infamous  Frederick  William  II.  to 
death."  To  his  political  fanaticism  he  joined  the  intensest 
hatred  of  Christianity,  declaring  himself  publicly  the  "personal 
enemy  of  Jesus  Christ."  Involved  with  Hubert  and  Chaumette 
in  the  charge  of  corrupting  the  public  morals,  he  was  guillo- 
tined by  the  very  mob-regime  for  which  he  hud  shown  so 
much  fanatical  devotion. 


408 


APPENDIX. 


Note  29. — Cambon.    See  page  205. 

Cainbon  was  a  violent  JacobiD,  who  contributed  to  the  fall 
of  Robespierre,  and  finally  managed  to  outlive  the  Revolution. 
He  died  in  exile  at  Brussels  in  1820,  aged  sixty-six. 


Note  30. — Custine.    See  page  211. 

Custine,  a  French  nobleman,  who  ardently  embraced  the 
Revolution,  had  imbibed  the  spirit  of  Liberty  with  Lafayette 
in  America.  The  reward  he  obtained  for  all  his  sacrifices  was, 
death  at  the  hands  of  the  Terrorist  tribunal  on  a  groundless 
charge  of  treason.  Whatever  his  life  may  have  been,  he 
died  like  a  Christian. 


Note  31. — Chaumette.    See  page  212. 

Chaumette  was  an  obscene  Atheist-Terrorist,  born  in  1765, 
who  figured  largely  in  the  darkest  period  of  the  Reign  of 
Terror.  He  rejected  his  Christian  name,  and  played  the  high 
priest  in  the  worship  of  Reason  in  Notre  Dame.  He  boasted 
that  he  could  recognize  the  traitors  by  their  very  looks  as  they 
passed  in  the  streets.  He  was  swept  into  eternity  with  the 
rest  of  the  vile  atheistic  herd,  March  24,  1794. 


Note  32. — Hebert.  See  page  213. 
This  man,  who  gave  his  name  to  the  atheistic  party,  and  is 
generally  classed  with  Clootz  and  Chaumette  for  moral  infamy, 
was  born  in  1755,  and  executed  in  1794.  He  obtained  noto- 
riety as  the  editor  of  a  low  journal,  Pere  DucJtene,  proposed 
obscene  questions  to  the  Queen  on  her  trial,  and  played  a 


APPENDIX. 


409 


large  part  in  the  great  massacres.  Atheism  might  well  dis- 
pense with  the  honor  of  having  had  such  a  man  for  priest  and 
apostle. 


Note  33.— Fouche.    See  page  229. 

Fouche,  at  first  a  teacher  of  philosophy,  then  a  cruel,  blas- 
pheming Jacobin,  and  afterward  a  powerful  instrument  of 
tyranny  in  the  hands  of  Napoleon,  was  born  at  Nantes  in 
1763,  and  died  at  Trieste  in  1820.  Brought  up  in  a  cloister, 
he  became  a  bitter  persecutor  of  the  Church,  having  polluted 
many  altars,  and  on  one  occasion  even  caused  the  Bible  to  be 
dragged  through  the  streets  at  the  tail  of  an  ass.  After  the 
fall  of  Robespierre  he  changed  his  politics,  (not  his  principles, 
for  he  never  had  any,)  and  played  an  important  role  during  the 
whole  of  Napoleon's  career. 


Note  34. — St.  Just.    See  page  240. 

St.  Just,  the  friend  of  Robespierre,  the  austere  Stoic,  the  re- 
morseless Terrorist,  was  born  in  1768,  and  guillotined  July  27, 
1794.  Of  noble  family,  careful  culture,  great  keenness  of  intel- 
lect, of  unbounded  enthusiasm  for,  and  devotion  to,  what  he 
regarded  as  the  true  principles  of  liberty,  he  was  well  fitted 
for  the  cruel  role  he  played  in  the  triumvirate  of  Robespierre, 
Couthon,  and  himself.  Victim  of  the  fatal  doctrine  that  all 
justice  and  right  must  yield  to  what  is  regarded  as  for  the 
interest  of  the  u  public  safety,"  he  was  the  organ  of  many  of 
the  worst  crimes  of  the  Reign  of  Terror.  He  was  a  sort  of 
merciless,  heartless  incarnation  of  logic.  He  was  executed 
at  the  age  of  twenty-six. 


Note  35.— Fouquier-Tesville.    Sec  page  241. 

Fouquier-Tinville,  the  Public  Accuser  of  the  revolutionary 
tribunal,  who  remorselessly  sent  thousands  to  the  guillotine, 

52 


410 


APPENDIX. 


was  born  in  Picardy,  1747,  and  executed  on  the  fall  of  Robes- 
pierre in  1794.  Without  talent,  and  with  a  coldly  sanguinary 
nature,  he  was  a  proper  man  to  execute  the  purposes  of  the 
Terrorists. 


Note  36. — Tallien.    See  page  249. 

Tallien,  born  in  1769,  known  at  first  as  an  editor,  later  as  a 
violent  Jacobin,  became  finally  the  chief  instrument  in  the 
fall  of  Robespierre.  The  rise  of  Napoleon  threw  him  into  the 
shade.    He  died  in  1820. 


Note  37. — Barras.    See  page  273. 

Barras,  of  an  ancient  noble  family  of  Provence,  of  adven- 
turous youth,  dissipated  manners,  reckless,  daring  character,  at 
one  time  a  Jacobin  and  Terrorist,  and  afterward  an  active 
agent  in  inaugurating  the  military  despotism  of  Bonaparte, 
was  born  in  1755,  and  died  in  retirement  in  1829. 


Note  38. — La  Reveilliere-Lepatjx.    See  page  279. 

This  whimsical  reformer  and  high  priest  of  Deism  was  born 
in  1753.  As  member  of  the  Convention,  he  defended  in  vain 
the  Girondists,  eluded  the  wrath  of  Robespierre,  became  a  Di- 
rector, refused  to  take  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  Napoleon,  lived 
then  in  obscurity  for  a  time,  and  died  in  1824. 


Note  39. — Jordan.   See  page  280. 

Camille  Jordan,  born  at  Lyons  in  1769,  was  one  of  the  few 
French  revolutionists  who  united  to  radical  republicanism  a 
sincere  respect  for  and  faith  in  the  Christian  religion.  He 


APPENDIX. 


411 


opposed  the  anarchy  of  the  Jacobins  and  the  absolutism  of 
Napoleon,  but  held  office  under  the  restored  Bourbons.  He 
died  in  1821. 


Note  40. — Royer-Collard.    See  page  280. 

Royer-Collard  was  a  philosopher-politician,  who  joined  con- 
stitutional liberalism  to  a  deep  reverence  for  religion.  In  phi- 
losophy he  opposed  the  prevalent  sensualism,  and  was  the 
precursor  of  Cousin.    He  died  in  1845,  at  the  age  of  seventy. 


Note  41. — Portalis.    See  page  303. 

Portalis,  a  moderate  liberal,  the  Minister  of  Religion  under 
Napoleon,  was  born  in  Provence  in  1746,  and  died  in  1807. 


Note  42. — Napoleon.    See  page  327. 

We  make  the  following  extract  from  a  critique  on  Napo- 
leon's career  by  Dr.  Channing  : 

"  We  close  our  view  of  Bonaparte's  character  by  saying,  that 
his  original  propensities,  released  from  restraint  and  pampered 
by  indulgence  to  a  degree  seldom  allowed  to  mortals,  grew  up 
into  a  spirit  of  despotism  as  stern  and  absolute  as  ever  usurped 
the  human  heart  The  love  of  power  and  supremacy  absorbed, 
consumed  him.  No  other  passion,  no  domestic  attachment, 
no  private  friendship,  no  love  of  pleasure,  no  relish  for  letters 
or  the  arts,  no  human  sympathy,  no  human  weakness,  divided 
his  mind  with  the  passion  for  dominion,  and  for  dazzling 
manifestations  of  his  power.  Before  this,  duty,  honor,  love, 
humanity,  fell  prostrate.  Josephine,  we  are  told,  was  dear  to 
him ;  but  the  devoted  wife,^vho  had  stood  firm  and  faithful  in 
the  day  of  his  doubtful  fortunes,  was  cast  off  in  his  prosperity 
to  make  room  for  a  stranger  who  might  be  more  subservient 


412 


APPENDIX. 


to  Ms  power.  He  was  affectionate,  we  are  told,  to  his  brothers 
and  mother;  but  his  brothers,  the  moment  they  ceased  to  be 
his  tools,  were  disgraced ;  and  his  mother,  it  is  said,  was  not 
allowed  to  sit  in  the  presence  of  her  imperial  son.  He  was 
sometimes  softened,  we  are  told,  by  the  sight  of  the  field  of 
battle  strewn  with  the  wo'unded  and  dead.  But,  if  the  Moloch 
of  his  ambition  claimed  new  heaps  of  slain  to-morrow,  it  was 
never  denied.  With  all  his  sensibility,  he  gave  millions  to  the 
sword  with  as  little  compunction  as  he  would  have  brushed 
away  so  many  insects  which  had  infested  his  march.  To  him 
all  human  will,  desire,  power,  were  to  bend.  His  superiority 
none  might  question.  He  insulted  the  fallen  who  had  con- 
tracted the  guilt  of  opposing  his  progress;  and  not  even 
woman's  loveliness,  and  the  dignity  of  a  queen,  could  give 
shelter  from  his  contumely.  His  allies  were  his  vassals,  nor 
was  their  vassalage  concealed.  Too  lofty  to  use  the.  arts  of 
conciliation,  preferring  command  to  persuasion,  overbearing  and 
all-grasping,  he  spread  distrust,  exasperation,  fear,  and  revenge 
through  Europe ;  and,  when  the  day  of  retribution  came,  the 
old  antipathies  and  mutual  jealousies  of  nations  were  swal- 
lowed up  in  one  burning  purpose  to  prostrate  the  common 
tyrant,  the  universal  foe." 


Note  43.— Pius  VH.    See  page  346. 

Pius  VH.,  born  at  Cesena  in  1740,  of  the  noble  family  of  the 
Chiaramonti,  was  made  Cardinal  in  1785,  and  during  the 
early  period  of  the  French  Revolution  manifested  very  liberal 
political  sentiments.  Soon  after  the  death  of  the  unfortunate 
Pius  VI.  he  was  elected  to  the  Papal  See  by  the  conclave 
which  met  at  Venice.  His  reign  dates  from  March  13,  1800. 
His  rule,  from  the  fall  of  Napoleon  to  his  death,  which  hap- 
pened August  20,  1823,  was  not  Sappy  for  his  subjects.  He 
was  too  favorable  to  the  despotic  principles  of  Austria. 


APPENDIX. 


413 


Note  44.— Fesch.    See  page  368. 

Joseph  Fesch,  Cardinal  Archbishop  of  Lyons,  brother  of 
Napoleon's  mother,  was  born  in  Corsica  in  1763,  and  made 
Cardinal  in  1803.  He  accompanied  Pope  Pius  VII.  to  Paris 
in  1804  on  the  occasion  of  the  coronation  of  Bonaparte,  en- 
joyed the  favor  of  the  Emperor  till  1809,  and  spent  the  latter 
part  of  his  life  in  Rome.    He  died  in  1839. 


INDEX. 


•  Alison,  his  estimate  of  the  French  Kevo- 
lution,  5. 
Ambrose,  St.,  referred  to,  117. 
America  the  only  perfectly  tolerant  na- 
tion, 38. 

Anslas,  Boissy  <T,  his  wholesome  policy, 

2(31-263 ;  268,  282. 
Anti-Sabbath  orders,  310.  ■ 
Apostasy,  217-220;  of  Protestants,  225. 
Atheism,  professed,  161,  166;  in  conflict 

with  Deism,  233;  worse  than  Paganism, 

247:  persecutes  without  excuse,  277; 

its  schools,  281;  its  moral  fruits,  203. 
Aubcrt.  the  prtest,  absurd  marriage  of,  171. 
Augereau,  274. 
August  4,  croat  epoch  of,  58. 
Avignon,  il9— 121. 

Babeuf,  273. 

Baillv,  wisdom  of,  55;  pleads  for  liberty, 
135. 

Ball,  the,  of  the  victims,  251. 
Bainave,  71 ;  impolicy  of,  113. 
Barras,  273. 
Barrei  e,  103,  211. 
Bastille, taking  of,  58. 
Herthier,  29h 

Bishops,  constitutional,  124;  of  France, 
dissent  from  the  Pope,  122. 

Bonapaite,  Joseph,  his  marriage,  371. 

Bossuet.  his  politics  drawn  from  the  Bi- 
ble, 25.  44. 

Biavard  put  to  death.  ISO. 

Brienne,  intolerance  of,  43,  124;  resigns 
his  canlinalate,  125. 

Brittany  alarmed,  100. 


Calas,  judicial  murder  of,  35. 

Calendar,  the  atheistic,  214 ;  retroactive, 

290. 

Cambon,  182,  205,  259. 
Campo  Formio,  285. 
Carnot,  273. 

Catechism,  Napoleonic,  365. 

Catholic  Church,  declension  of  pietv  in, 

32  ;  feeble  apologists  of,  33 ;  its  hold  on 

the  people  in  17!>9,  58,100. 
Cavou'r,  his  great  political  axiom,  77. 
Cazales  warns  against  persecution,  114. 
Centralization,  150,  320;  fatal  effects  of. 

322  ;  complete,  336. 
Cesarism,  382. 
(  habot,  224. 

Channing's  opinion  of  Napoleon,  note  42. 
Chaumette,  213;  attacks  the  priests,  231 ; 

recants  his  Atheism,  236. 
Chenier  pleads  for  liberty  of  conscience, 

153,  226. 

Church  Councils  at  Paris,  310-312. 
Church  and  State  separated,  260. 
Civil  Constitution  of  the  Clergy,  91-97. 
Civil  War.  101. 

Clergy,  the  high,  intolerant,  43,  44  ;  allow- 
ance to  be  made  for,  45;  they  flatter 
Napoleon,  863. 

Clergy,  the  lower,  46;  enthusiastic  for 
liberty.  50. 

Clootz,  201. 

Comedian>  enfranchised,  89. 
Committee,  the  ecclesiastical,  78 ;  report 

of,  81. 
Collot,  200 

Concordats  of  1268  and  1516,  30. 


414 


INDEX. 


Concordat  of  Napoleon,  840;  its  basis, 
345;  its  provisions,  349-353 ;  is  unpopu- 
lar at  Paris,  351 ;  proclaimed  in  Notre 
Dame,  345;  criticised  by  Gregory,  356; 
led  to  persecution,  359 ;  is  bitterly  re- 
gretted, 377. 

Condorcet,  196,  201. 

Conscience,  danger  of  violating,  186 ;  de- 
fies force,  336. 
Consulate,  the,  318. 

Contrat  Social,  the  germ  of  the  French 

Eevolution,  39,  62;  realized,  177,  243. 
Convents,  80. 

Convention,  the,  187;  its  rashness,  190; 

its  immorality,  195;  its  energy,  210; 

its  close,  270. 
Corday,  Charlotte,  referred  to,  209. 
Coups  d'etat,  271,  273,  284,  286,  351. 
Courage,  moral,  201. 
Couthon,  155,  241. 
Cowardice  of  Deputies,  250. 
Custine,  211. 

Danton,  205,  209. 
"  Death  an  eternal  sleep,"  230. 
Deism  attempts  to  become  a  religion, 

242,  296. 
Demagogism,  202. 

Desmoulins,  Camille,  84;  satirizes  the 
clergy,  116-118,  164,  192 ;  is  envied  by 
Eobespierre,  239. 

Despots  make  a  bugbear  of  the  French 
Eevolution,  8. 

Despotism,  319,  367-369. 

Diamond  necklace,  the,  scandal  of,  34. 

Directory,  the,  its  Constitution,  269 ;  its 
members,  273;  its  politics,  275;  its  hos- 
tility to  the  Papacy,  280,  291. 

Divorce  rendered  easy  and  frequent,  294. 

Dom  Gerle,  produces'  an  excitement,  83, 
86. 

Ducos,  157. 

Duhot,  the  Knight  ol  the  Decades,  2S9. 
Dumas,  179. 
Dumouriez,  172. 
Duphot,  291. 
Dupont,  195. 

Dupuis  saves  Notre  Dame,  230. 
Duval,  ridiculous  proposition  of,  155. 

Elizaheth,  the  Princess,  233. 
Em  Up,  the,  burned,  39.  * 
Expilly,  124, 126. 

Fahre  d'Eglantine  explains  the  atheistical 
policy,  215. 

Fanaticism,  atheistical,  183-202 ;  a  rela- 
tive term,  258. 

Fauehet,  155;  absurd  conduct  of,  173. 

Fcne'on,  27. 

Fesch,  Cardinal,  368. 

Festival  "of  the  Supreme  Being,11  244;  of 
the  Decades,  266.  * 
Feudalism  aholished,  59. 
Foucbe,  his  violence,  229. 
Francois  de  Nantes,  irreligion  of,  175. 
French  Eevolution,  generous  outset  of, 


50 ;  sad  goal  of,  325 ;  when  to  be  con- 
cluded, 379 ;  one  of  its  great  lessons,  384. 

Gallican  Church,  liberties  of,  29 ;  council 
of,  at  Paris,  305. 

Gallois  and  Gensonne,  their  mission  to 
La  Vendee,  146, 158. 

Girondists,  the,  criticized",  143,  192. 

"  Gloria  in  Excelsis  of  the  People,"  47. 

Gobel,  Archbishop,  124;  his  insipid  mo- 
rality, 126;  lauds  Mirabeau,  127,  170; 
apostatizes,  219. 

God  as  a  means  of  ruling  the  masses,  243; 
the  only  basis  of  society,  271 ;  irksome 
to  the  impious,  276 ;  patronized  by  Na- 
poleon, 356. 

Gospel,  the,  of  the  fiesh,  225-231. 

Gouttes,  Abbot,  46,  71. 

Gregory,  47;  on  the  rights  of  man,  61; 
moderation  of,  82 ;  complains  of  popular 
prejudice,  100;  his  character,  124,  255, 
noble  efforts,  256,  290;  helps  to  re-es- 
tablish worship,  304-309,  365. 

Hebert,  213,  225;  recants  his  Atheism, 
236 ;  his  followers  executed,  240. 

Heroism  of  Gregory,  221-223. 

Hoche,  General,  on  religious  liberty,  265. 

Huguenots  defended  by  a  Catholic  Bish- 
op, 257. 

Humiliating  epoch,  287. 

Incivism,  253. 

Infancy  profaned,  128,  217. 

Infidelity  in  low  places,  264 ;  attacks  re- 
ligion indirectly,  266;  its  vain  hopes, 
267. 

Inquisition,  atheistical,  288. 

Jacobins,  85. 

James  I.  alluded  to,  116. 

Jansenists,  24 ;  persecuted,  32,  33,  46, 140. 

Jews,  oppression  of,  27 ;  become  a  State 

Church,  360. 
Jordan,  280;  eulogizes  Cfiristianity,  281, 

282. 

Jourdan,  the  beheader,  152. 

Laboulaye,  rema'rk  of,  76. 

Lafayette,  42 ;  protects  the  Assembly,  85; 
recommends  free-churchism,  131,  132, 
135,  145,  178,  321;  his  counsels  to  Na- 
poleon, 340. 

Lalande,  223. 

Lameth,  80 ;  taunts  the  clergy,  84. 
Lamourette,  124. 
Lanjuinais,  134,  191,  194. 
Lasource,  the  Protestant,  314. 
Lebon,  200. 

Le  Coz,  124,  173;  noble  efforts  of,  137. 
Lependre,  172. 

Legislative  Assembly,  141 ;  parties  in  142. 
Lejeune,  155. 

Lepaux,  the  Theophilanthropist,  276,  279, 
2S7. 

Liberty  according  to  Eobespierre,  238; 
rendered  hateful,  265. 


INDEX. 


415 


Liberty  of  Conscience  claimed  by  the 
Catholics,  149;  strange  notion  of  it, 
204;  opposed  by  Robespierre,  206 ;  in- 
compatibility with  despotism,  335. 

Liudet,  infamy  of,  2.'0,  226. 

Louis  XIV.  dominated  the  Church,  97. 

Louis  XVI.  warned  by  the  Pope,  121 ;  bis 
conscience  violated,  130;  effects  of  bis 
flight,  137,  194. 

Louis  Blanc,  162. 

Lucon,  Bishop,  zeal  of,  147. 

Malesberbes,  tolerant,  42. 
Malouet,  113. 

Marat,  bis  journal,  116,193;  worshiped, 
22S. 

Marie  Antoinette,  212. 
Massacres  at  Avignon,  152;  of  September, 
1S3. 

Mattei,  Cardinal,  intercedes  for  the  Pope, 
279. 

Maury,  Abbot,  70  ;  confidence  of,  83, 113, 
149. 

Menou,  noble  sentiments  of,  86. 

Michelet  defines  the  French  Revolution, 
6 ;  apologizes  for  K  terror,"  162 ;  un- 
fairness of,  232.  247. 

Military  glory,  when  of  worth,  275. 

Mirabeau,  54,  56,  60,  73,  86;  his  prejudice 
against  the  Jews,  S9;  is  inconsequent, 
114;  defines  religion,  115. 

Mob,  the,  a  dangerous  ally,  57,  131,  135, 
180. 

Monastic  orders,  79 ;  suppressed,  80 ;  pen- 
sions given  to  the  monks,  81. 
Monneron,  157. 

Montalembert  admits  the  corruption  of 

the  monks,  79. 
Montesquieu,  37-39. 

Moral  sentiments  the  only  basis  of  gov- 
ernment, 272. 
Moy  defends  free-churchism,  176. 

Napoleon  not  a  representative  of  the 
Trench  Revolution,  19,  241,  274,  277, 
2S4,  286,  312 ;  not  the  restorer  of  relig- 
ion, 316:  his  contempt  for  libertv,  321- 
323;  is  faithless,  324;  his  contempt  of 
the  French,  325 ;  his  family  discords, 
325;  his  motive  in  restoring  Catholi- 
cism, his  religion,  bis  opposition  to  free- 
churchism,  326;  is  a  radical,  328;  ad- 
mires a  subservient  clergy.  230 ;  is  zeal- 
ous for  Pomanism.  331  ;  his  speech  at 
Milan,  332;  his  emotions  at  hearing  a 
parish  bell,  334,  335;  turns  theologian, 
38S ;  "  plays  tricks  with  the  old  fox," 
339;  needs  a  Pope,  342;  is  impatient 
to  make  the  Concordat,  347 ;  becomes 
intolerant,  360,  362;  threatens  to  dis- 
pense with  a  Pope,  374 

Necker.  6S. 

Noir.  heroism  of,  ISO. 

Non-jurors,  their  worship  molested,  131, 
144;  profess  loyalty,  169;  restore  then- 
worship,  802. 

Notables,  Assembly  of,  41. 


Nuns  persecuted,  167 ;  heroism  of,  200. 

Oath,  political,  refused  by  the  priests, 

111-113;  modified,  198. 
Organic  articles,  352,  370 ;  still  in  force, 

380. 

Pacca,  Cardinal,  375;  favors  a  free  Church 

878. 

Paganism  reviving,  331. 
Paquot,  Christian  heroism  of,  185. 
Parens,  infamy  of,  218. 
Paris  at  its  lowest,  1S4,  197. 
Pasquinade  on  the  Pope,  348. 
Peter-pence,  51. 
Petion,  70,  191. 
Penn  referred  to,  38. 
Pichegru,  274. 

Pius  VI  ,  119-121;  condemns  the  new 

Church,  123 :  is  impolitic,  126,  150,  170; 

is  arrested,  291. 
Pius  VII.,  346;  his  motives  in  crowning 

Napoleon,  370,  372. 
Popular  sovereignty,  a  false,  pernicious, 

3S3. 

Portaiis,  803,  363. 

Pressense,  his  qualifications  and  stand- 
point, 5-12. 

Priests,  hard  fate  of,  180. 

Property,  ecclesiastical,  origin  of,  66; 
confiscated,  74 ;  sale  of,  79. 

Protestants  persecuted,  41,  813;  St.  An- 
dre, Julien,  314;  tolerated  by  the  Or- 
ganic Articles,  352 ;  accept  the  Concor 
dat,354;  suffer  from  connection  with 
State,  360-362. 

Rabaut,  63;  president  of  the  Assembly, 
88,  314. 

Radicals,  their  excesses,  111 ;  their  temp- 
tations, 209. 

Reason,  the  worship  of,  226-22S. 

Religion  a  people's  only  solace  in  calam- 
ity, 77 ;  not  an  object  of  civil  law,  207 ; 
compels  respect,  261 ;  strongest  when 
unsupported  by  the  State,  292;  only 
basis  of  social  order,  293;  its  self-re- 
generating power,  300 ;  is  degraded  to  a 
means  by  Napoleon,  357. 

Revenue  of  the  Clergy,  28. 

Rewbell,  276. 

Rhode  Island,  its  early  toleration  alluded 
to,  88. 

Rights  of  man,  62,  64. 

Robespierre,  40,  80 ;  pleads  for  the  Jews, 
S9;  favors  a  salaried  clergy,  94,  192; 
on  depravity,  202 ;  fears  religious  lib- 
erty, 20S;  acts  ignobly,  233;  attacks 
the  Atheists.  234;  thinks  a  God  indis- 
pensable, 235 ;  become  s  high  priest, 
239;  theological  views,  242 ;  begins  to 
fall,  245,  259. 

Roland,  174  ;  his  insolence,  177. 

Romme,  214. 

Rousseau,  influence  of  bis  writings,  89  ;  is 
intolerant,  40;  fruits  of  his  theories, 
189, 176. 


416  INDEX. 


Royer-Collard,  280;  pleads  for  modera- 
tion, 283. 

Sabbath,  the,  persecuted,  289 ;  not  over- 
come, 299 ;  anecdote,  315. 
Sansculottism,  213. 
St.  Denis,  Church  of,  sacked,  212. 
St.  Just,  193,  240. 
Schism  in  Eomanism,  123. 
Sicard,  185. 

Sieves,  46,  56,  60;  on  liberty  of  con- 
science, 133,  224,  285,  321. 

Sisters  of  Charity,  137. 

Sbamelessness  of  an  abbot,  87. 

Stael,  Madame  de,  her  estimate  of  the 
French  Eevolution,  6;  on  Napoleon's 
Church  policy,  341.  . 

State,  the,  an  idol  of  the  French,  31 ;  its 
right  over  the  Church  as  a  corporate 
body,  75. 

State  and  Church,  true  relation  of,  275, 
283. 

Siate-Church  system,  the,  260 ;  perilous 

to  the  Bourbons,  381. 
States-General,  49,  52. 

Talleyrand,  46;  urges  to  confiscation  of 
the  Church  property,  69,  121 ;  on  liber- 
ty of  conscience,  132,  347. 

fallieu,249;  his  illiberalisin,  270. 


Te  Beums,  59,  307. 

Temporal  domain  of  the  Pope  alienated, 
280. 

Temporal  power  not  essential  to  Catholi- 
cism, 307. 

Terror,  Reign  of,  dawning,  138,  155;  its 
instruments,  195;  its  remorselessness, 
211. 

Theophilanthropy,  273-276;  attempts  to 
become  a  religion,  296-300 ;  is  forced 
into  Catholic  churches,  310. 

Theot,  Catherine,  the  prophetess,  246. 

Third  Estate,  53,  55. 

Thouret,  71,  136. 

Tinville,  241. 

Tithes  abolished,  60. 

Tocqueville,  50. 

Tolerance,  true  principles  of,  257. 
Torne,  Bishop,  173 ;  violence  of,  180. 

Vacancies  in  the  Church,  113. 

Vergniaud,  152,  175 ;  sarcasm  of,  176 ;  his 
grand  speech,  179;  he  describes  tho 
Convention,  193. 

Vernacular,  the,  in  worship,  recommend- 
ed by  a  Bishop,  308. 

Voltaire,  25 ;  renders  a  signal  service  to 
the  Protestants,  36;  but  attacks  Chris- 
tianity, 37 ;  his  ashes  translated  to  the 
Pantheon,  136. 


THE  END. 


Date  Due 

■BP***' 

